state-of-mayflower-v-ukrainiantrucking

Mayflower District Court

#state-of-mayflower-v-ukrainiantrucking

This is the start of #state-of-mayflower-v-ukrainiantrucking channel.

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-04 03:27 p.m.

New Case

ukrainiantrucking v. State of Mayflower

Case Type

criminal

Case Number

CR-154-25

clerkFlow pinned a message to this channel.2026-01-18 03:02 p.m.

Xerxy 2025-09-04 03:28 p.m.

Assigned to Magistrate @Ocazius

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-04 03:33 p.m.

Channel Permissions Synced

Permissions have been synced to Chambers of Magistrate Ocazius.

Ocazius 2025-09-04 03:44 p.m.

How did this happen

Ocazius used

/add

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-04 03:48 p.m.

Case Modified

@Ocazius

has added @acarlyle to the case channel.

Ocazius 2025-09-04 03:48 p.m.

@acarlyle

Would I be correct in assuming that this is meant to be State of Mayflower v. UkrainianTrucking?

Ocazius 2025-09-04 04:06 p.m.

Draft summons

Ocazius

@acarlyle Would I be correct in assuming that this is meant to be State of Mayflower v. UkrainianTrucking?

acarlyle 2025-09-04 05:01 p.m.

correct

Ocazius 2025-09-04 05:01 p.m.

@Xerxy

What happened here lol

Ocazius 2025-09-04 05:01 p.m.

Please amend as necessary

Ocazius

@Xerxy What happened here lol

Xerxy 2025-09-04 05:17 p.m.

fixed

Xerxy 2025-09-04 05:17 p.m.

Ocazius

Draft summons

acarlyle 2025-09-05 05:51 a.m.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xTgdFKvZdWzrcNBLvy01fM2M5fbyZjAkagtB_6wVMBc/edit?usp=sharing

State of Mayflower v. ukraniantrucking - Criminal Summons

MAYFLOWER DISTRICT COURT State of Mayflower, Plaintiff(s), v. ukraniantrucking, Defendant(s). Case No. CR-154-25 Presiding: Hon. Ocazius SUMMONS To: ukraniantrucking YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear at the time, date, and place set forth below to APPEAR i...

Ocazius 2025-09-05 11:25 a.m.

@acarlyle

AoPC and CC please - upload to site and send courtesy here.

Ocazius 2025-09-05 11:26 a.m.

CI*

acarlyle 2025-09-05 12:16 p.m.

Criminal Information & Affidavit of Probable Cause

AOPC - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WR2_MxrEL7mBGrqeQyaDxXgwR-fi-_hL/view?usp=sharing
CI - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FXlhkw1J7dMsATr1t_hQt4hJlFkprpCb/view?usp=sharing
@Ocazius

CR-154-25, Plaintiff, Affidavit of Probable Cause.pdf

CR-154-25, Plaintiff, Information.pdf

Ocazius 2025-09-05 03:37 p.m.

Will review in morning.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 07:31 a.m.

Probable cause found @acarlyle .

Ocazius 2025-09-06 07:31 a.m.

Will summon now.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 07:36 a.m.

acarlyle 2025-09-06 08:14 a.m.

@Ocazius

Criminal procedure rules dictate that a Sheriffs Deputy must serve. As to avoid any defenses or issues arising from you serving the defendant. I ask that you command a Sheriff's Deputy to serve the Defendant also.

acarlyle 2025-09-06 08:14 a.m.

This is because of the felony charges against the Defendant.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 08:29 a.m.

@warcry

Serve to Defendant, forgot that these are felonies. Information is above by the way. Upload to google drive if you wish.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 09:03 a.m.

Deputy has notified me that Defendant has been served.(edited)

Ocazius used

/timer

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-06 09:03 a.m.

Timer

Monday, September 8, 2025 at 9:03 a.m.

(5 months ago)

acarlyle 2025-09-06 12:20 p.m.

Thank you.

Ocazius used

/add

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-06 02:52 p.m.

Case Modified

@Ocazius

has added @baker to the case channel.

baker 2025-09-06 02:52 p.m.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 02:52 p.m.

@baker

Verify your account buddy

baker 2025-09-06 02:53 p.m.

i cant

baker 2025-09-06 02:53 p.m.

ok so how does this work

baker 2025-09-06 02:53 p.m.

can i just like plead not guitly and find a lawyer or something

Ocazius 2025-09-06 02:53 p.m.

public-information

baker 2025-09-06 02:53 p.m.

do i get legal representation

Ocazius 2025-09-06 02:53 p.m.

Head there and click verify.

baker 2025-09-06 02:54 p.m.

ok i did

baker 2025-09-06 02:54 p.m.

now what

baker

now what

Ocazius 2025-09-06 02:57 p.m.

Do you have an attorney or do you want me to assign a Public Defender?

baker 2025-09-06 02:58 p.m.

public defender

baker 2025-09-06 02:58 p.m.

if i find an attorney later can it be switched

baker

if i find an attorney later can it be switched

Ocazius 2025-09-06 02:59 p.m.

Yes, you can fire your court appointed representative at any time.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 02:59 p.m.

One mooment please

baker 2025-09-06 02:59 p.m.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:02 p.m.

@Public Defender's Office

Please have an attorney assigned to this case.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:02 p.m.

ASAP please. If you cannot speak here, ping me in public-defenders .

Ocazius used

/add

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-06 03:36 p.m.

Case Modified

@Ocazius

has added @taxi to the case channel.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:36 p.m.

@taxi

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:37 p.m.

I don't need a NoA.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:38 p.m.

@acarlyle

@taxi

@baker

Available for discord arraignment right now?

baker 2025-09-06 03:38 p.m.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:39 p.m.

It's a yes or no response I'm looking for.

baker 2025-09-06 03:39 p.m.

yes

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:40 p.m.

Alright I'll just begin then.

baker 2025-09-06 03:40 p.m.

well shouldnt they be here aswell

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:40 p.m.

They will read and follow a long.

baker 2025-09-06 03:41 p.m.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:42 p.m.

# ARRAIGNMENT

@acarlyle

of record, for the State.

@taxi

of record, for the Defendant.

*We're convened this September 6th in the matter titled State of Mayflower versus UkranianTrucking, No. CR-154-25. *

Mr. UkranianTrucking, I must ensure you understand your rights during this proceeding:

1. You have the right to remain silent. You do not have to speak or provide any information that could incriminate you.
2. You have the right to an attorney present during any questioning or legal proceedings. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you at no cost.
3. You have the right to a fair public trial where evidence will be presented, and witnesses can be called to testify on your behalf.
4. You have the right to confront witnesses against you and test their evidence. You can question them in court.

Please respond with the following to indicate your understanding of these rights:

I understand my rights as they were read to me.

@baker

baker 2025-09-06 03:43 p.m.

i understand my rights as they were read to me

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:46 p.m.

The State has filed a criminal complaint and subsequent information, alleging you of:

Count 1 - Grand Theft Auto

The Department of Justice of the State of Mayflower, by this criminal information,
accuses the defendant of the crime of Grand Theft Auto, in violation of Title 1, Subtitle 3,
Chapter I § 3103 of the Mayflower State Criminal Code, committed as follows:
The defendant, in the County of Clark, on or about the 7th day of August, 2025, stole
another person’s vehicle whilst unoccupied, to wit, the Defendant smashed the windows of
Sectionism’s unoccupied police vehicle and then got in the driver’s seat, and drove the vehicle
away without the permission of Sectionism.

Count 2 - Breaking and Entering

The Department of Justice of the State of Mayflower, by this criminal information,
accuses the defendant of the crime of Breaking and Entering in violation of Title 1, Subtitle 3,
Chapter II § 3201 of the Mayflower State Criminal Code, committed as follows:
The defendant, in the County of Clark on or about the 7th day of August, 2025, used
force to bypass a physical restriction of a whitelisted vehicle in order to gain entry to the vehicle,
to wit, the Defendant used his baton to smash the windows of Sectionism’s vehicle, allowing him
to bypass the whitelisted restriction on the victim’s vehicle, allowing the Defendant to gain
access to said vehicle.

Count 3 - Assault

The Department of Justice of the State of Mayflower, by this criminal information,
accuses the defendant of the crime of Assault in violation of Title 1, Subtitle 2, Chapter III §
2305 of the Mayflower State Criminal Code, committed as follows:
The defendant, in the County of Clark on or about the 7th day of August, 2025, caused
Sectionism to be in reasonable fear of harm without consent, to wit, the Defendant used his baton
to smash the windows of Sectionism’s vehicle, whilst he was inside, causing him to be in fear of
being harmed by the Defendant.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:46 p.m.

(I am not finished, just splitting messages)

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:47 p.m.

Count 4 - Obstruction of Justice

The Department of Justice of the State of Mayflower, by this criminal information,
accuses the defendant of the crime of Obstruction of Justice in violation of Title 1, Subtitle 1,
Chapter III § 1312 of the Mayflower State Criminal Code, committed as follows:
The defendant, in the County of Clark on or about the 7th day of August, 2025, hindered
a peace officer from performing his official functions, to wit, the Defendant stole the vehicle of
Sectionism, who was an on duty peace officer. In stealing his police vehicle, the Defendant
hindered Sectionism from responding to calls for service, or distress calls from colleagues.

Count 5 - Grand Theft Auto

The Department of Justice of the State of Mayflower, by this criminal information,
accuses the defendant of the crime of Grand Theft Auto in violation of Title 1, Subtitle 3,
Chapter I § 3103 of the Mayflower State Criminal Code, committed as follows:
The defendant, in the County of Clark on or about the 7th day of August, 2025, stole
another person’s vehicle whilst unoccupied, to wit, the Defendant smashed the windows of
DivineMissile’s unoccupied police vehicle and then got in the Driver’s seat, and drove the
vehicle away without the permission of DivineMissile.

Count 6 - Breaking and Entering

The Department of Justice of the State of Mayflower, by this criminal information,
accuses the defendant of the crime of Breaking and Entering in violation of Title 1, Subtitle 3,
Chapter II § 3201 of the Mayflower State Criminal Code, committed as follows:
The defendant, in the County of Clark on or about the 7th day of August, 2025, used
force to bypass a physical restriction of a whitelisted vehicle in order to gain entry to the vehicle,
to wit, the Defendant used his baton to smash the windows of DivineMissile’s vehicle, allowing
him to bypass the whitelisted restriction on the victim’s vehicle, allowing the Defendant to gain
access to said vehicle.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:47 p.m.

Count 7 - Assault with a Deadly Weapon

The Department of Justice of the State of Mayflower, by this criminal information,
accuses the defendant of the crime of Assault with a Deadly Weapon in violation of Title 1,
Subtitle 2, Chapter III § 2302 of the Mayflower State Criminal Code, committed as follows:

The defendant, in the County of Clark on or about the 7th day of August, 2025, assaulted
DivineMissile using an object capable of causing serious bodily harm, to wit, the Defendant used
a stolen police vehicle to cause the victim to be in reasonable fear of harm. A vehicle is an object
which is capable of causing serious bodily harm.

Count 8 - Felony Hit and Run

The Department of Justice of the State of Mayflower, by this criminal information,
accuses the defendant of the crime of Felony Hit and Run in violation of Title 1, Subtitle 2,
Chapter III § 2306 of the Mayflower State Criminal Code, committed as follows:
The defendant, in the County of Clark on or about the 7th day of August, 2025, failed to
stop after being involved in a traffic accident, where another person was injured, to wit, the
Defendant strikes DivineMissile with a stolen police vehicle, causing injury to the victim. The
Defendant failed to stop at the scene of the traffic accident.

Count 9 - Obstruction of Justice

The Department of Justice of the State of Mayflower, by this criminal information,
accuses the defendant of the crime of Obstruction of Justice in violation of Title 1, Subtitle 1,
Chapter III § 1312 of the Mayflower State Criminal Code, committed as follows:
The defendant, in the County of Clark on or about the 7th day of August, 2025, hindered
a peace officer from performing his official functions, to wit, the Defendant stole the vehicle of
DivineMissile, who was an on duty peace officer. In stealing his police vehicle, the Defendant
hindered DivineMissile from responding to calls for service, or distress calls from colleagues.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:47 p.m.

Count 10 - Felony Reckless Driving

The Department of Justice of the State of Mayflower, by this criminal information,
accuses the defendant of the crime of Felony Reckless Driving in violation of Title 2, Subtitle 1,
Chapter II § 1213 of the Mayflower State Criminal Code, committed as follows:
The defendant, in the County of Clark on or about the 7th day of August, 2025,
committed three traffic violations within a short span of time, to wit, the Defendant was seen
driving away in a stolen police car in which he strikes a pedestrian, runs a red light, drives the
wrong way and fails to signal a change of direction.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:47 p.m.

@baker

@taxi

On the above ten counts, please list your pleading for each of them.

baker 2025-09-06 03:48 p.m.

not guilty for all of them

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:49 p.m.

The court notes the Defendant’s ten pleas of not guilty, and the clerk will so enter.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:49 p.m.

Arraignment closed.

Ocazius used

/pretrial

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-06 03:49 p.m.

Pretrial Schedule

Discovery will be taken care of separately during the pretrial period.

Pre-trial motions will be accepted until

Sunday, September 14, 2025 at 3:49 p.m.

or 5 months ago.

The pre-trial period will end on Tuesday, September 16, 2025 at 3:49 p.m. or 4 months ago.

Ocazius 2025-09-06 03:49 p.m.

Discovery will be closed in 96 Hours

Ocazius used

/timer

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-06 03:50 p.m.

Timer

Wednesday, September 10, 2025 at 3:50 p.m.

(5 months ago)

acarlyle 2025-09-06 03:50 p.m.

I’ll submit discovery tonight

acarlyle 2025-09-06 03:53 p.m.

tomorrow latest

taxi 2025-09-06 04:25 p.m.

@Ocazius

Your Honour, I wish to have a probable cause hearing in regards to count 8

taxi 2025-09-06 04:27 p.m.

Count 8 of the information charges my client with felony hit and run, stating that he was allegedly involved in a traffic accident, however, nowhere in the affidavit does it actually mention a traffic accident

taxi 2025-09-06 04:34 p.m.

also, would it be alright i we extend discovery by one day?

taxi 2025-09-06 04:34 p.m.

if*

Ocazius 2025-09-06 04:34 p.m.

I'm off to a party right now but I'll review in the morning.

taxi

also, would it be alright i we extend discovery by one day?

Ocazius 2025-09-06 04:35 p.m.

Isn't 4 days long enough?

acarlyle 2025-09-06 04:35 p.m.

"The Defendant assaulted Deputy DivineMissile by ramming into him in a reckless manner."

Ocazius 2025-09-06 04:35 p.m.

No we are not hearing arguments right now.

Ocazius

Isn't 4 days long enough?

taxi 2025-09-06 04:35 p.m.

I've got exams monday to wednesday so I'm not going to get much done till wednesday evening

Ocazius 2025-09-06 04:35 p.m.

Alright I'll extend it if we get to the deadline and have no discovery submitted.

taxi 2025-09-06 04:36 p.m.

Sounds good. Enjoy your party

acarlyle 2025-09-10 10:00 a.m.

Prosecutions Discovery

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RZAGnHmsIVULg7GgoB-TS8Rv7d_BYf92/view?usp=sharing
@Ocazius @taxi

CR-154-25, Plaintiff, Discovery.pdf

Ocazius 2025-09-10 11:15 a.m.

Thanks, please upload to site if you haven't(edited)

acarlyle 2025-09-10 11:17 a.m.

Have, just needs one of the clerks to approve the many filings ive made

Ocazius 2025-09-10 11:59 a.m.

They aren't showing up on the site

Ocazius 2025-09-10 11:59 a.m.

I have no pending filings from MatthewSandringham

taxi 2025-09-10 01:04 p.m.

@Ocazius

Will definitely need an extra day.

taxi

@Ocazius Will definitely need an extra day.

Ocazius 2025-09-10 01:43 p.m.

You can have 24 hours from now

taxi 2025-09-10 02:17 p.m.

@Ocazius

I move to quash count ten, "Felony Reckless Driving" of the criminal information due to a lack of probable cause.

Count ten of the information claims that the defendant "ran a red light, drives the wrong way and fails to signal a change of direct," however this is not supported in the affidavit of probable cause.

taxi 2025-09-10 02:17 p.m.

@acarlyle

taxi

Count 8 of the information charges my client with felony hit and run, stating that he was allegedly involved in a traffic accident, however, nowhere in the affidavit does it actual...

taxi 2025-09-10 02:21 p.m.

I also wish to reiterate this

acarlyle 2025-09-10 03:09 p.m.

Probable Cause has already been established

acarlyle 2025-09-10 03:13 p.m.

And even then. The Probable Cause statement alleges enough facts to support the Felony Reckless Driving Count

acarlyle

Probable Cause has already been established

taxi 2025-09-11 11:35 a.m.

And I’m contesting it

acarlyle 2025-09-11 11:50 a.m.

im thrilled for you

taxi 2025-09-11 11:52 a.m.

What's with the sarcastic comments

taxi 2025-09-11 11:55 a.m.

@Ocazius

@acarlyle

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CMuuvzYzgrEFcm9Yv7nV0VSjpM4GyOQf/view?usp=sharing

CR-154-25, Defendant, Discovery (1).pdf

taxi 2025-09-11 11:56 a.m.

I'm not particulary sure on how to upload it with the site

acarlyle 2025-09-11 12:03 p.m.

what is Mr waves being used as an expert for?

taxi 2025-09-11 12:09 p.m.

Oops

taxi 2025-09-11 12:09 p.m.

That’s supposed to be lay

taxi 2025-09-11 12:09 p.m.

Thanks for the catch

taxi 2025-09-11 12:09 p.m.

I’ll send an amended copy

taxi 2025-09-11 01:02 p.m.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CMuuvzYzgrEFcm9Yv7nV0VSjpM4GyOQf/view?usp=sharing

CR-154-25, Defendant, Discovery (1).pdf

taxi

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CMuuvzYzgrEFcm9Yv7nV0VSjpM4GyOQf/view?usp=sharing

Ocazius 2025-09-11 03:21 p.m.

Go on courts.clarkcounty.site

Ocazius 2025-09-11 03:22 p.m.

Click file

Ocazius 2025-09-11 03:22 p.m.

file it please

Ocazius 2025-09-11 03:23 p.m.

I will review Count 8 and 10 shortly.

Ocazius

Go on courts.clarkcounty.site

taxi 2025-09-11 03:50 p.m.

I only have the option to file new cases

taxi 2025-09-11 03:56 p.m.

I'm not familiar with this site

acarlyle 2025-09-11 07:30 p.m.

probably havent been added

Ocazius 2025-09-12 02:00 p.m.

@Xerxy

Can you add him please?

Ocazius 2025-09-12 02:00 p.m.

I thought it was an auto role checker thing

taxi 2025-09-12 03:32 p.m.

@Xerxy

taxi 2025-09-13 05:01 p.m.

@Ocazius

Not been added yet

Ocazius 2025-09-13 05:07 p.m.

@Xerxy

Helooooooooooooo

acarlyle 2025-09-15 06:43 a.m.

@Kezzera

Seen as Mr Ocazius has failed his nomination, I ask that you reassign this matter as a priority given that it is a criminal case.

acarlyle

@Kezzera Seen as Mr Ocazius has failed his nomination, I ask that you reassign this matter as a priority given that it is a criminal case.

taxi 2025-09-15 09:09 a.m.

What nomination

taxi

What nomination

acarlyle 2025-09-15 09:11 a.m.

Magistrate nomination

acarlyle

Magistrate nomination

taxi 2025-09-15 10:00 a.m.

Is he not already a magistrate..?

taxi

Is he not already a magistrate..?

acarlyle 2025-09-15 10:05 a.m.

No, he was recess appointed by the looks of it, failed senate nom

taxi 2025-09-15 11:01 a.m.

How does that work then

taxi 2025-09-15 11:02 a.m.

@acarlyle

No need to re-assign https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1279205812237107281/1417141097054077070

Ocazius 2025-09-15 11:56 a.m.

@Xerxy

I am still waiting for you to add this public defender to the site

Ocazius 2025-09-15 11:56 a.m.

Can you pls do this

taxi 2025-09-15 04:23 p.m.

@Ocazius

Is there no one else we can ask

Ocazius 2025-09-15 04:59 p.m.

@Kezzera

Ocazius 2025-09-15 04:59 p.m.

I'm not sure who operates the site

Ocazius 2025-09-15 04:59 p.m.

or who the court technicians are

taxi 2025-09-16 02:46 p.m.

@Ocazius

@acarlyle

The defendant does assert their right to a speedy trial

acarlyle 2025-09-16 02:47 p.m.

pre trial ends in an hour chief

taxi 2025-09-16 02:48 p.m.

Ok?

taxi 2025-09-16 02:49 p.m.

I’m saying the defendant asserts their right to a speedy trial

taxi 2025-09-16 02:49 p.m.

Is that an issue

acarlyle 2025-09-16 02:51 p.m.

No, Im just saying that pre-trial ends in an hour. Is that an issue?

acarlyle 2025-09-16 02:52 p.m.

But you could end it now and agree to the plea deal, unless your client is unaware of that plea deal? Did you inform your client of the deal that was proposed?

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:00 p.m.

I apologise for the wait, I'm just going to recognize your discovery as the site hasn't been fixed yet.

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:00 p.m.

Just doing my ethical duty in confirming that you did forward any plea agreements to your client @taxi ?

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:00 p.m.

Client/assigned person you know what I mean

Ocazius

@Xerxy I am still waiting for you to add this public defender to the site

Xerxy 2025-09-16 03:06 p.m.

done

Ocazius

Just doing my ethical duty in confirming that you did forward any plea agreements to your client @taxi ?

taxi 2025-09-16 03:33 p.m.

I have

taxi

I have

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:33 p.m.

Please upload to site

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:33 p.m.

now that you've been added

Xerxy

done

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:33 p.m.

taxi 2025-09-16 03:33 p.m.

Will do now

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:33 p.m.

Pretrial ends in 16 minutes but I will end early if you both are ready to move to trial @acarlyle

@taxi

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:33 p.m.

Since I'm on

acarlyle 2025-09-16 03:34 p.m.

are we going asynch ? @Ocazius

Ocazius

Pretrial ends in 16 minutes but I will end early if you both are ready to move to trial @acarlyle

@taxi

taxi 2025-09-16 03:35 p.m.

That's fine with me,

taxi 2025-09-16 03:35 p.m.

I've uploaded the document

taxi

I've uploaded the document

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:36 p.m.

Timezone?

acarlyle

are we going asynch ? @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:36 p.m.

Timezone?

acarlyle 2025-09-16 03:37 p.m.

BST

taxi 2025-09-16 03:38 p.m.

What is asynch

Ocazius

Timezone?

taxi 2025-09-16 03:38 p.m.

GMT/BST

taxi

What is asynch

acarlyle 2025-09-16 03:38 p.m.

No set times for testimony etc

taxi

What is asynch

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:38 p.m.

Discord

taxi 2025-09-16 03:38 p.m.

Oh right

taxi 2025-09-16 03:38 p.m.

I don't see a need

taxi 2025-09-16 03:38 p.m.

For that

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:38 p.m.

I will do discord but I will set time limits, in teh interest of a speedy trial

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:39 p.m.

I'm kinda busy to be hopping in game

taxi 2025-09-16 03:39 p.m.

In-game would be nice but I suppose if we can't all make it then we'll have to go without

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:40 p.m.

Would you both agree to having 96 hours to question a witness? If witness takes too long to respond without a valid reasoning, they are fined and extra time to the 96 hours is added. If counsel takes too long, they won't be fined but they will use up their own time and I will move on after 96 hours.

acarlyle 2025-09-16 03:40 p.m.

I will agree to that

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:40 p.m.

Sounds like a long time but I'm also presiding over a case which has been on one witness for 3 months now

Ocazius

Would you both agree to having 96 hours to question a witness? If witness takes too long to respond without a valid reasoning, they are fined and extra time to the 96 hours is adde...

taxi 2025-09-16 03:40 p.m.

That's fine

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:43 p.m.

Alright

taxi 2025-09-16 03:44 p.m.

Actually

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:44 p.m.

# TRIAL TRANSCRIPT HAS BEGUN

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:44 p.m.

Voided

taxi 2025-09-16 03:44 p.m.

@Ocazius

We haven't yet discussed my probable cause objections

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:44 p.m.

What's up

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:44 p.m.

Was this a written or oral motion

taxi 2025-09-16 03:44 p.m.

Oral

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:44 p.m.

Oh oral ok

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:44 p.m.

Let me reread

taxi 2025-09-16 03:44 p.m.

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:45 p.m.

Are you interested in writing a written motion for 8 and 10 or are you satisfied with your arguments already?

acarlyle 2025-09-16 03:46 p.m.

Your honor, state contends that there are enough present facts within the Affidavit that leads you to draw conclusions as to probable cause. That's all I'll say on the matter, unless you have questions.

taxi 2025-09-16 03:47 p.m.

I'm fine with just presenting an oral argument in the interest of time

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:47 p.m.

As for Count 8, I find that 'ukraniantrucking is driving in such a reckless manner that he drives over the body of Deputy DivineMissile', 'Defendant assaulted Deputy DivineMissile by ramming into him in a reckless manner' and 'Defendant took health from DivineMissile’s character' clearly identify a traffic accident to justify the Fel Hit and Run.

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:47 p.m.

So I stand with my original probable cause finding on that

taxi

I'm fine with just presenting an oral argument in the interest of time

taxi 2025-09-16 03:50 p.m.

I'd like to reiterate that the AOPC doesn't corrobate the claims of the defendant running a red light, driving the wrong way and failing to signal found in the CI

taxi 2025-09-16 03:50 p.m.

(For count 10)

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:50 p.m.

Bud I'm trying to type my decision

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:51 p.m.

Probable cause requires facts and circumstances sufficient to warrant a reasonable belief that the accused committed the crime. The affidavit alleges that the defendant unlawfully took control of a police vehicle and operated it in a reckless manner by striking a pedestrian, driving in a manner that created a substantial risk of harm, and committing multiple traffic violations within a short span of time. I find that these facts are pretty adequate at this stage to warrant a reasonable belief that the defendant engaged in Felony Reckless Driving.

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:52 p.m.

It doesn't have to explicitely lay out each of the three crimes to constitute reckless driving

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:52 p.m.

I remind you that the reckless driving charge isn't just three crimes, it also allows for driving deemed reckless...

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:52 p.m.

So I uphold my decision to find probable cause on both counts.

taxi 2025-09-16 03:53 p.m.

That's fine

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:57 p.m.

# TRIAL TRANSCRIPT BEGINS BELOW

Ocazius 2025-09-16 03:57 p.m.

@acarlyle

State's opening statement please, 48 hours to do so or waive.

taxi 2025-09-16 03:57 p.m.

Is 48 hours necessary

taxi 2025-09-16 03:58 p.m.

I'm sure it doesn't take that long

acarlyle 2025-09-16 04:00 p.m.

Dont worry, I'll have it shortly, just typing it out and fine tuning it!

taxi

Is 48 hours necessary

Ocazius 2025-09-16 04:04 p.m.

I heard the latest GPT is really slow

Ocazius 2025-09-16 04:04 p.m.

all the environmentalists burning the data centers sir

acarlyle 2025-09-16 04:05 p.m.

Good Evening, I am State Attorney MatthewSandringham, of the Department of Justice’s Public Integrity Office, today, my role is to walk you through the events that occurred on the 7th of August, 2025.

Your Honor, we are here today to engage in one of the most protected constitutional practices of the Union of Columbia, to put the Defendant to trial for his crimes. The State has the undoubted burden of proving beyond all reasonable doubt that the Defendant is guilty of all 10 counts of the information.

Today, the State will demonstrate that on the 7th of August, the Defendant, ukraniantrucking, abused his privileges as a State Certified Security Officer in doing so, he broke into 2 police vehicles and drove them away. In doing so, he hindered 2 Sheriff’s Deputies from conducting their official duties. The State will demonstrate that the Defendant assaulted Deputy Sectionism when he smashed the window of his patrol car. Finally your Honor, the state will prove that the Defendant, in a heinous act, ran down Deputy DivineMissile, and fled the scene.

These grave acts against our brave Law Enforcement Officers cannot and should not be tolerated in a functioning society, that is why it is the job of this court to analyse and to review every aspect of our evidence, which will show that the Defendant is guilty beyond all reasonable doubt on all 10 counts of the information.

At the end of this trial, Your Honor, the State will have proved all aspects of the crime, and all criminal charges beyond all reasonable doubt, and hopes that the court returns a verdict of guilty on all charges. Thank you.

acarlyle 2025-09-16 04:05 p.m.

@Ocazius

@taxi

Ocazius

all the environmentalists burning the data centers sir

taxi 2025-09-16 04:07 p.m.

Ted Kaczynski has not died

taxi 2025-09-16 04:09 p.m.

I'll just give my opening statement as well

acarlyle 2025-09-16 04:11 p.m.

Just a correction on my statement, any reference to Sectionism as a Deputy is incorrect, he is an MBI Agent.

taxi 2025-09-16 04:11 p.m.

The criminal information is filled with lies by the State.

The defendant did not commit the crimes he's being accused of.

The State will not prove the aspects of the crime.

Thank you.

taxi 2025-09-16 04:11 p.m.

I yield.

acarlyle

Just a correction on my statement, any reference to Sectionism as a Deputy is incorrect, he is an MBI Agent.

taxi 2025-09-16 04:12 p.m.

Even you're not sure of the case yet you want to prosecute him

acarlyle 2025-09-16 04:12 p.m.

Oh no, i called him a deputy, god shoot me now.

taxi 2025-09-16 04:13 p.m.

refrain from making jokes counsellor, you're failing miserably

taxi 2025-09-16 04:14 p.m.

let's hope your advocacy skills are better than your comedy skills

acarlyle 2025-09-16 04:16 p.m.

@Ocazius

State calls @divine

taxi 2025-09-16 04:16 p.m.

Has his honour called for witnesses yet?

acarlyle 2025-09-16 04:18 p.m.

You wanted a speedy trial, Im allowing him to give you that by being expedient.

But whilst we are at it Your honor, I also ask that you remind opposing counsel of your chamber rules which dicates that they must show respect to opposing counsel. Maybe instead of opposing counsel throwing insults, he could focus on defending his client?

taxi 2025-09-16 04:20 p.m.

It's not that I want a speedy trial, it's that my defendant has the right to a speedy trial tyvm

Ocazius used

/add

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-16 04:27 p.m.

Case Modified

@Ocazius

has added @divine to the case channel.

Ocazius used

/administeroath

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-16 04:28 p.m.

@divine

(edited)

Oath Selection

Which type of oath would you like to swear to?

Religious

- Involves swearing to god that your testimony is, or will be, truthful.

Non-Religious

- Solemnly affirms that your testimony is, or will be, truthful, under the pains and penalties of perjury.

Religious Oath

Non-Religious Oath

Ocazius 2025-09-16 04:28 p.m.

May proceed once he does so. I’ll be offline.

taxi 2025-09-16 04:41 p.m.

@divine

taxi 2025-09-16 04:41 p.m.

@divine

Ocazius 2025-09-16 05:01 p.m.

@divine

BotclerkFlow

@divine

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-16 05:09 p.m.

@divine

Non-Religious Oath

Do you solemnly affirm that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, under the pains and penalties of perjury?

divine 2025-09-16 05:09 p.m.

yes

acarlyle 2025-09-16 05:10 p.m.

State your name for the record. @divine

divine 2025-09-16 05:10 p.m.

divinemissile

acarlyle 2025-09-16 05:10 p.m.

Are you employed within the State of Mayflower? @divine

divine 2025-09-16 05:10 p.m.

yes

acarlyle 2025-09-16 05:10 p.m.

Where are you employed?

divine 2025-09-16 05:11 p.m.

i am employed in dot, maa, mpaw, ccso, mtp and postal office i believe

acarlyle 2025-09-16 05:11 p.m.

Were you in game August 7th, 2025? @divine

divine 2025-09-16 05:12 p.m.

yes

acarlyle 2025-09-16 05:13 p.m.

I'm going to show you State's Exhibit B, please review it, let me know once done.

acarlyle 2025-09-16 05:14 p.m.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AJYyqIXNmcTnXTIuVf6SEQusCQ4L2deb/view

@divine

lSDugjFcfvJIp8baXLb9XhR.mp4

divine 2025-09-16 05:14 p.m.

reviewed

acarlyle 2025-09-16 05:14 p.m.

Do you recognise Exhibit B? @divine

divine 2025-09-16 05:15 p.m.

yes

acarlyle 2025-09-16 05:15 p.m.

How do you recognise Exhibit B?

divine 2025-09-16 05:15 p.m.

this is my clip

acarlyle 2025-09-16 05:15 p.m.

To your knowledge has this Exhibit been altered in any way?

divine 2025-09-16 05:15 p.m.

no sir

acarlyle 2025-09-16 05:16 p.m.

Does this Exhibit accurately depict the events that occured August 7th, at approximately 03:35 Tokyo Time?

divine 2025-09-16 05:16 p.m.

yes sir

acarlyle 2025-09-16 05:16 p.m.

Thank you. The State moves to admit Exhibit B into evidence @Ocazius

@taxi

taxi 2025-09-16 05:23 p.m.

No objection

taxi 2025-09-16 05:23 p.m.

@acarlyle

acarlyle

Thank you. The State moves to admit Exhibit B into evidence @Ocazius

@taxi

Ocazius 2025-09-17 02:49 a.m.

So admitted.

Ocazius 2025-09-17 02:49 a.m.

Continue

acarlyle 2025-09-17 03:04 a.m.

@divine

Looking at Exhibit B, where are you?

acarlyle

@divine Looking at Exhibit B, where are you?

divine 2025-09-17 03:06 a.m.

i am near district court, right across the street

divine

i am near district court, right across the street

acarlyle 2025-09-17 03:16 a.m.

Can you see the defendant in Exhibit B?

acarlyle

Can you see the defendant in Exhibit B?

divine 2025-09-17 04:11 a.m.

Yes

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:26 a.m.

@divine

Can you point out (tag) the defendant

acarlyle

@divine Can you point out (tag) the defendant

divine 2025-09-17 04:49 a.m.

@baker

divine

@baker

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:51 a.m.

What was the defendant doing when you encountered him?

acarlyle

What was the defendant doing when you encountered him?

divine 2025-09-17 04:56 a.m.

walking around the place, coming up to me asking if the vehicle is mine

without a response from me, the defendant took out his baton and began to break my windows, later on managing to get inside and take off with the police vehicle

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:59 a.m.

What were you doing at the time? @divine

acarlyle

What were you doing at the time? @divine

divine 2025-09-17 05:05 a.m.

i was ensuring peace and order at the time, overlooking the place due to it's heightened rise in population

divine

i was ensuring peace and order at the time, overlooking the place due to it's heightened rise in population

acarlyle 2025-09-17 05:06 a.m.

When the Defendant stole your vehicle and drove it away, what happened?

acarlyle

When the Defendant stole your vehicle and drove it away, what happened?

divine 2025-09-17 05:08 a.m.

in the process of the vehicle getting stolen i got ran over by my vehicle

the defendant then turned left into another street, to where I never saw my vehicle again

divine

in the process of the vehicle getting stolen i got ran over by my vehicle the defendant then turned left into another street, to where I never saw my vehicle again

acarlyle 2025-09-17 05:10 a.m.

Did the Defendant's actions stop you from conducting your duties?

acarlyle

Did the Defendant's actions stop you from conducting your duties?

divine 2025-09-17 05:11 a.m.

yes, due to not having my vehicle available at hand I was unable to respond to any calls

acarlyle 2025-09-17 05:15 a.m.

Just going to backtrack slightly.

When the Defendant took your vehicle, were you in the vehicle at the time?

divine 2025-09-17 05:15 a.m.

no, I was a few feet away from my locked vehicle

divine

in the process of the vehicle getting stolen i got ran over by my vehicle the defendant then turned left into another street, to where I never saw my vehicle again

acarlyle 2025-09-17 05:17 a.m.

And again slight backtrack, who was driving the vehicle when you were struck by it?

divine 2025-09-17 05:17 a.m.

the defendant @baker

acarlyle 2025-09-17 05:18 a.m.

How do you know it was the Defendant?

divine 2025-09-17 05:18 a.m.

when we were in close proximity i was able to see his username

divine

when we were in close proximity i was able to see his username

acarlyle 2025-09-17 05:19 a.m.

Did the defendant stop after striking you?

divine 2025-09-17 05:20 a.m.

acarlyle 2025-09-17 05:21 a.m.

That is all. No further questions unless there are any objections that lead to questions being struck.

@Ocazius

@taxi

Ocazius 2025-09-17 09:08 a.m.

Marvellous

Ocazius 2025-09-17 09:08 a.m.

@taxi

Witness is yours

acarlyle

@divine Can you point out (tag) the defendant

taxi 2025-09-17 11:03 a.m.

Object, leading and relevance

taxi 2025-09-17 11:03 a.m.

We all know who the defendant is…

Ocazius 2025-09-17 11:11 a.m.

Overruled

Ocazius 2025-09-17 11:12 a.m.

Objection is as pointless as the question

Ocazius 2025-09-17 11:12 a.m.

Witness is yours if you have no other objections.

Ocazius

Witness is yours if you have no other objections.

taxi 2025-09-17 11:22 a.m.

I’ll begin shortly

taxi 2025-09-17 11:36 a.m.

@divine

Hello

taxi 2025-09-17 11:36 a.m.

You were near the distric court, correct?

taxi

You were near the distric court, correct?

divine 2025-09-17 12:08 p.m.

District Court, yes. Across the street.

divine

District Court, yes. Across the street.

taxi 2025-09-17 12:12 p.m.

What were you doing there?

divine 2025-09-17 12:13 p.m.

i was ensuring peace and order at the time, overlooking the place due to it's heightened rise in population

taxi 2025-09-17 12:13 p.m.

You testified that it was your car that was parked and taken by the defendant, correct?

divine 2025-09-17 12:14 p.m.

Yes I stated that it was my vehicle which was stolen by the defendant

divine

Yes I stated that it was my vehicle which was stolen by the defendant

taxi 2025-09-17 12:16 p.m.

And there was "No Parking" sign right where your car was parked, wasn't there?

acarlyle 2025-09-17 12:16 p.m.

Objection, Irrelevant. It's not materially relevant, as Law Enforcement are exempt from Title 2 offenses, which includes illegal parking. @Ocazius

acarlyle

Objection, Irrelevant. It's not materially relevant, as Law Enforcement are exempt from Title 2 offenses, which includes illegal parking. @Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-17 12:17 p.m.

According to..?

acarlyle 2025-09-17 12:17 p.m.

State Law?

taxi 2025-09-17 12:17 p.m.

Yeah, can you cite a statute..?

acarlyle 2025-09-17 12:19 p.m.

4 M.S.C. 5 Section 2301

acarlyle 2025-09-17 12:19 p.m.

& 2302

taxi 2025-09-17 12:21 p.m.

"Displaying emergency lights"

acarlyle 2025-09-17 12:21 p.m.

2302(a) "applies regardless if the emergency light is active or not"

acarlyle 2025-09-17 12:27 p.m.

And even then, the defendant isnt a parking enforcement officer or a peace officer, so he wouldnt be able to do anything about it.

Ocazius 2025-09-17 12:29 p.m.

Objection sustained @taxi

@acarlyle

. Next time though, please provide your reference in the objection message.

Ocazius 2025-09-17 12:29 p.m.

Next question please.

taxi 2025-09-17 12:35 p.m.

@Ocazius

The question is crucial for my line of questioning, I'm not calling the witness out for illegally parking

taxi 2025-09-17 12:36 p.m.

I recognise that law enforcement are exempt

Ocazius 2025-09-17 01:04 p.m.

So explain how the question is relevant

Ocazius

So explain how the question is relevant

taxi 2025-09-17 01:22 p.m.

It's a matter of the defendant's state of mind

taxi 2025-09-17 01:23 p.m.

I'm trying to show the defendant lacked the mens rea for the crimes

acarlyle 2025-09-17 01:35 p.m.

Its still not relevant, as I have already said, the Defendant couldnt enforce traffic laws anyway.

taxi 2025-09-17 01:46 p.m.

@Ocazius

trust me

taxi

I'm trying to show the defendant lacked the mens rea for the crimes

Ocazius 2025-09-17 02:25 p.m.

What has a no parking sign got to do with anything?

Ocazius

What has a no parking sign got to do with anything?

taxi 2025-09-17 02:26 p.m.

Idk how to explain it other than that it'll show the D lacked the mens rea

taxi 2025-09-17 02:27 p.m.

If it's irrelevant, you can strike it from the record.

Ocazius 2025-09-17 03:27 p.m.

I'll overturn my original ruling and overrule the objection, but you have five questions to establish its relevance or I will strike it.

Ocazius 2025-09-17 03:27 p.m.

@taxi

taxi

And there was "No Parking" sign right where your car was parked, wasn't there?

taxi 2025-09-17 03:28 p.m.

@divine

If you could answer the question please

Ocazius

I'll overturn my original ruling and overrule the objection, but you have five questions to establish its relevance or I will strike it.

taxi 2025-09-17 03:29 p.m.

Thanks your honor

Ocazius

I'll overturn my original ruling and overrule the objection, but you have five questions to establish its relevance or I will strike it.

acarlyle 2025-09-17 03:31 p.m.

Preserving this for appeal.

acarlyle 2025-09-17 03:31 p.m.

Overturning something on the premise of "trust me" isn't the right way of exercising judicial power.

acarlyle

Overturning something on the premise of "trust me" isn't the right way of exercising judicial power.

Ocazius 2025-09-17 03:43 p.m.

Excuse me? Conditional admission of evidence pending a display of relevance is pretty standard practice. FRE Rule 104(b) which details conditional relevance, allows a court to admit evidence provisionally if it is later connected to the facts, which counsel has assured me he will do within 5 questions. My ruling is not based on 'trust', it's an assessment of that offer of proof against the rules of evidence. I set a question limit and you can object once over. Please stop interrupting trial with your silly comments.

acarlyle 2025-09-17 03:47 p.m.

Counsel assured you by saying "trust me", how does that assist you in making a decision that his "evidence" will be relevant? And I must say, FRE 104(b) itself has been applied erroneously, we aren't determining if a fact exists.

As I said, I am preserving your ruling for appeal, based on the fact it isn't founded in law.

acarlyle 2025-09-17 03:48 p.m.

And my comment wasn't "silly", it was necessary to convey how erroneous the ruling was.

divine 2025-09-17 03:54 p.m.

@Ocazius

so.. do i respond to this question or not ?

divine 2025-09-17 03:54 p.m.

i am confuse..!

acarlyle 2025-09-17 03:54 p.m.

yes @divine

taxi

And there was "No Parking" sign right where your car was parked, wasn't there?

divine 2025-09-17 03:58 p.m.

a few studs forward, not exactly where my car was at

acarlyle

Counsel assured you by saying "trust me", how does that assist you in making a decision that his "evidence" will be relevant? And I must say, FRE 104(b) itself has been applied err...

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:01 p.m.

Oh I get it

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:01 p.m.

You aren't just a closed minded baiter

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:01 p.m.

You're a blind closed minded baiter too

acarlyle

Overturning something on the premise of "trust me" isn't the right way of exercising judicial power.

taxi 2025-09-17 04:02 p.m.

You know full well that "trust me" isn't my reasoning

Ocazius

You aren't just a closed minded baiter

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:03 p.m.

I want your recusal. You clearly have an issue with myself as a licensed member of the bar. You on numerous occasions have insulted me, I do not for a fact believe that you can remain truly impartial in this matter.

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:03 p.m.

I want a house in spain

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:03 p.m.

Bring it up with the chief judge

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:04 p.m.

I have, and I await whatever he says.

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:04 p.m.

Then quit disrupting trial

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:04 p.m.

@taxi

you may continue

divine

a few studs forward, not exactly where my car was at

taxi 2025-09-17 04:04 p.m.

@divine

So therefore, providing it was the defendant's job to make sure no one was illegally parking on that road, it's possible that he thought he was entitled to move the vehicle to carry out his duties, right?

divine 2025-09-17 04:04 p.m.

no, it's not his job to enforce title 2 offenses

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:04 p.m.

objection.

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:05 p.m.

Withdrawn

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:05 p.m.

LOL

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:06 p.m.

I swear to the skies above if you continue to do this, whatever it is, whether its seeking attention or intentionally disrupting trial, I will stop you.

divine

no, it's not his job to enforce title 2 offenses

taxi 2025-09-17 04:06 p.m.

@Ocazius

I move to strike non responsive

divine 2025-09-17 04:06 p.m.

wat ?

divine 2025-09-17 04:06 p.m.

wat does that mean

taxi

@Ocazius I move to strike non responsive

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:06 p.m.

He answered your question. The Defendant's job isn't parking enforcement

divine 2025-09-17 04:06 p.m.

you asked me a question and i answered it ?

taxi 2025-09-17 04:07 p.m.

I didn't ask him what his job was

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:07 p.m.

You misconstruing the defendant's job isn't the witness' fault

taxi 2025-09-17 04:07 p.m.

That'll come up.

divine 2025-09-17 04:07 p.m.

ok ill give a more defined answer

taxi 2025-09-17 04:07 p.m.

Wait for the judge's ruling please.

Ocazius

I swear to the skies above if you continue to do this, whatever it is, whether its seeking attention or intentionally disrupting trial, I will stop you.

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:07 p.m.

I made a perfectly good objection that was withdrawn because of the witness' answer... Stop with your impartiality

taxi 2025-09-17 04:07 p.m.

This is honestly a mess.

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:07 p.m.

rather your swewed impartiality&

divine 2025-09-17 04:07 p.m.

guys can we calm down ?

taxi 2025-09-17 04:07 p.m.

If these interruptions continue, I'll be filing a motion for mistrial because this is horrendous.

divine

no, it's not his job to enforce title 2 offenses

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:08 p.m.

You can't answer 'no its not his job' to a question that starts with 'providing it was the defendants job'. Your answer is stricken for the record, please give a more detailed and tailored response. Thanks

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:08 p.m.

Objeciton

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:08 p.m.

The defendant is a lay witness, he can't speak to that.

Ocazius

You can't answer 'no its not his job' to a question that starts with 'providing it was the defendants job'. Your answer is stricken for the record, please give a more detailed and ...

divine 2025-09-17 04:08 p.m.

but your honor, it's not their job ?

divine 2025-09-17 04:08 p.m.

but i will give a more defined answer

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:09 p.m.

and its also argumentative

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:09 p.m.

Don't give a more defined answer, I have yet to rule on the objection.

taxi 2025-09-17 04:09 p.m.

divine 2025-09-17 04:09 p.m.

ok your honor

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:10 p.m.

From now on, both counsels put your objections in one message with their explanations and basis. No random emojis or backchat with eachother. This will not turn into kingvictor1000-v-kingley-napely .

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:10 p.m.

I'm sustaining the objection for being argumentative.

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:10 p.m.

Please rephrase.

taxi 2025-09-17 04:11 p.m.

@divine

Therefore, if it was the defendant’s job to ensure that no one was illegally parking on that road, is it possible he may have believed he had the right to move the vehicle to carry out his duties?

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:11 p.m.

Argumentative again

divine 2025-09-17 04:11 p.m.

isnt this the same question ?

divine 2025-09-17 04:11 p.m.

do i respond to this

taxi 2025-09-17 04:12 p.m.

I really don't see how this is argumentative, I'm asking for his opinion

divine 2025-09-17 04:12 p.m.

@Ocazius

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:12 p.m.

Why are you asking a lay witness for an opinion?

taxi 2025-09-17 04:13 p.m.

It's a common sense question, you don't need someone with a PhD in psychology to answer that

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:13 p.m.

@Ocazius

ruling

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:18 p.m.

@AlbertBlackwell

is joining as co-counsel, he will unlikely be directly involved in witness examination, he's just here to make sure I dont say anything over the top.

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:18 p.m.

And if anything is to happen, he can take over

taxi

I really don't see how this is argumentative, I'm asking for his opinion

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:18 p.m.

It’s questionable

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:18 p.m.

I want a proper question

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:18 p.m.

Rephrase

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:18 p.m.

There are other ways of getting your point

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-17 04:19 p.m.

I will be filing a NOA shortly

cc: @Ocazius

Ocazius

I want a proper question

divine 2025-09-17 04:19 p.m.

so is the question sustained ?

divine 2025-09-17 04:19 p.m.

objection*

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:19 p.m.

yes

divine 2025-09-17 04:19 p.m.

taxi 2025-09-17 04:23 p.m.

@divine

Could the defendant, in trying to perform his duty to prevent illegal parking, have mistakenly believed that he had the right to move the vehicle?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-17 04:24 p.m.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RBbR_NumEgwuvYlQ35wGVuB3BEI3AUQw/view?usp=sharing

cc: @Ocazius

CR-154-25 Plaintiff co-counsel Notice of Appearance.pdf

taxi

@divine Could the defendant, in trying to perform his duty to prevent illegal parking, have mistakenly believed that he had the right to move the vehicle?

acarlyle 2025-09-17 04:27 p.m.

Objection, we're still arguing the law here @Ocazius

So now Im gonna ask that you tell defense counsel to move on from this line of questioning cause we're getting no where other than him continuously misinterpreting the legal duties of the Defendant, who was not a Law Enforcement Officer, nor was he a parking enforcement officer.

Ocazius 2025-09-17 04:28 p.m.

I’m out so this will be delayed 12 hours due to my timezone. I’ll add time to the end of questioning if needs be. Apologies.

taxi 2025-09-17 04:28 p.m.

I'm not sure whether to continue.

taxi 2025-09-17 04:28 p.m.

Or wait for the judge

taxi 2025-09-17 04:28 p.m.

To rule on the objection

acarlyle

Objection, we're still arguing the law here @Ocazius So now Im gonna ask that you tell defense counsel to move on from this line of questioning cause we're getting n...

acarlyle 2025-09-18 06:18 a.m.

also improper laymans opinion, just for clarification

taxi 2025-09-18 02:26 p.m.

The question isn't a point of law nor is it one that requires an expert...

divine 2025-09-18 02:28 p.m.

@Ocazius

AlbertBlackwell

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RBbR_NumEgwuvYlQ35wGVuB3BEI3AUQw/view?usp=sharing cc: @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-09-18 02:56 p.m.

Thanks

Ocazius 2025-09-18 02:58 p.m.

@taxi

taxi 2025-09-18 02:58 p.m.

Hello

Ocazius 2025-09-18 02:58 p.m.

The question calls for the witness to give a legal conclusion about the defendant’s right to act

Ocazius 2025-09-18 02:58 p.m.

I'm struggling to understand why you keep asking it

Ocazius 2025-09-18 02:59 p.m.

Is this a circumstantial question or a legal conclusion?

taxi 2025-09-18 02:59 p.m.

I'm not asking for a legal conclusion though

Ocazius

Is this a circumstantial question or a legal conclusion?

taxi 2025-09-18 02:59 p.m.

Well circumstantial

acarlyle 2025-09-18 03:13 p.m.

You’re asking him to provide his opinion as to whether or not the defendant had a legal duty, or mistakenly thought he had a legal duty…

acarlyle 2025-09-18 03:16 p.m.

As I said previously as well, defense counsel cant even get past their second question in this line of questioning, I ask that you revert back to your previous ruling, and tell him to move on.

Ocazius 2025-09-18 03:16 p.m.

There are a million ways to rephrase the question and I don't get why you keep choosing the objectionable one

Ocazius 2025-09-18 03:16 p.m.

I'm sustaining the objection, please rephrase @taxi

Ocazius 2025-09-18 03:16 p.m.

third time lucky?

taxi 2025-09-18 03:28 p.m.

Third times the charm

taxi 2025-09-18 03:34 p.m.

How am I actually meant to ask this

taxi 2025-09-18 03:35 p.m.

I don't see where the legal point is

taxi 2025-09-18 03:36 p.m.

@divine

Cars are usually not allowed to park where there are no parking signs, right?

taxi 2025-09-18 03:36 p.m.

"No parking" signs* (for clarity)

taxi

@divine Cars are usually not allowed to park where there are no parking signs, right?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-18 03:37 p.m.

Objection, question is leading @Ocazius

AlbertBlackwell

Objection, question is leading @Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-18 03:37 p.m.

It's a cross-examination

taxi

It's a cross-examination

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-18 03:39 p.m.

OK, withdrawn

taxi 2025-09-18 03:40 p.m.

@divine

Please answer

taxi

@divine Cars are usually not allowed to park where there are no parking signs, right?

divine 2025-09-18 03:40 p.m.

Yes

taxi

@divine Cars are usually not allowed to park where there are no parking signs, right?

acarlyle 2025-09-18 03:47 p.m.

Objection, move to strike. Relevance. @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-09-18 03:47 p.m.

I already said I'd allow him five questions to establish the relevance regarding the parking signs.

Ocazius 2025-09-18 03:47 p.m.

Remember, the 'trust me' meme you made of it

Ocazius 2025-09-18 03:47 p.m.

Overruled.

acarlyle 2025-09-18 03:48 p.m.

Yeh this is a different question tho?

Ocazius

Overruled.

acarlyle 2025-09-18 03:49 p.m.

Preserving for appeal. As I stated before, FRE 104(b) isnt even being applied correctly.

taxi 2025-09-18 03:49 p.m.

I've already established what I wanted to anyways. I

taxi 2025-09-18 03:49 p.m.

@divine

Moving on,

taxi 2025-09-18 03:50 p.m.

You said you were struck by the vehicle, right?

acarlyle 2025-09-18 03:50 p.m.

Ok. So now that defense has “established” what he wanted. How on earth was any of it relevant?

acarlyle

Ok. So now that defense has “established” what he wanted. How on earth was any of it relevant?

taxi 2025-09-18 03:50 p.m.

I can explain if you like

acarlyle 2025-09-18 03:50 p.m.

@Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-18 03:51 p.m.

Or will you cry that I'm testifying

taxi

I can explain if you like

acarlyle 2025-09-18 03:51 p.m.

What that the witness was entitled to be parked there, and the defendant couldnt do anything about it?

taxi 2025-09-18 03:52 p.m.

@Ocazius

Could you respectfully tell opposing counsel to stop interrupting my cross-examination if he isn't objecting to a question?

taxi 2025-09-18 03:52 p.m.

I expect better professionalism from the State.

Ocazius 2025-09-18 03:52 p.m.

@taxi

Did you finish your parking thing line?

Ocazius

@taxi Did you finish your parking thing line?

taxi 2025-09-18 03:52 p.m.

I have.

acarlyle 2025-09-18 03:52 p.m.

You said you established what you wanted to. So now I’m objecting to the line of questioning as it was wholly irrelevant.

Ocazius 2025-09-18 03:52 p.m.

Ok let me evaluate the relevance on whether or not to strike

Ocazius 2025-09-18 03:52 p.m.

as I previously promised

acarlyle

You said you established what you wanted to. So now I’m objecting to the line of questioning as it was wholly irrelevant.

taxi 2025-09-18 03:53 p.m.

Alright well then I'll explain, the point was that the witness was parked in a place that ordinarily you cannot park

Defendant didn't know that, therefore defendant wanted to move the vehicle so that he thought it was no longer illegally parked

Therefore, defendant lacked mens rea to commit a GTA

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-18 03:54 p.m.

If I may.

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-18 03:54 p.m.

@Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-18 03:54 p.m.

I'm sorry but is this a discussion or is it my turn to cross-examine the witness?

acarlyle 2025-09-18 03:54 p.m.

The defendant isnt a Law Enforcement Officer or a Parking Enforcement Officer so that’s irrelevant anyway

taxi 2025-09-18 03:54 p.m.

This isn't how trials go.

taxi 2025-09-18 03:55 p.m.

This is highly unprofessional

Ocazius 2025-09-18 03:55 p.m.

'Ok let me evaluate the relevance' does not mean everyone start pitching your arguments to me, it means shut up and let me read

taxi

This isn't how trials go.

acarlyle 2025-09-18 03:55 p.m.

We’re discussing our objection..

divine 2025-09-18 03:55 p.m.

i like this judge ocazius, he seems like a good fellow

divine 2025-09-18 03:55 p.m.

lets listen to judge

Ocazius 2025-09-18 03:56 p.m.

Chat can you all sybau please you don't discuss your objection with eachother

Ocazius

Chat can you all sybau please you don't discuss your objection with eachother

taxi 2025-09-18 04:17 p.m.

Any judgement yet your honour?

acarlyle 2025-09-19 07:49 a.m.

Is there a ruling? @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-09-19 01:50 p.m.

@taxi

Ocazius 2025-09-19 01:50 p.m.

@acarlyle

Ocazius 2025-09-19 01:51 p.m.

I get where you are coming from, counsellor, but Defendant's lack of status as parking enforcement officer or even an officer vested with the responsibility to enforce traffic laws, pretty much makes your line of questioning here irrelevant.

taxi

And there was "No Parking" sign right where your car was parked, wasn't there?

Ocazius 2025-09-19 01:52 p.m.

So I will be striking all questions and answers from this onwards.

Ocazius 2025-09-19 01:52 p.m.

You may continue with your questioning.

taxi 2025-09-19 01:56 p.m.

That's fine.

taxi 2025-09-19 01:57 p.m.

@divine

You testified that you got ran over by you vehicle, right?

taxi 2025-09-19 01:57 p.m.

by your*

taxi 2025-09-19 01:58 p.m.

@acarlyle

@AlbertBlackwell

Continuing my cross

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-19 01:58 p.m.

Acknowledged.

taxi

@divine You testified that you got ran over by you vehicle, right?

divine 2025-09-19 02:22 p.m.

i testifed that despite getting hit the vehicle did not stop

divine 2025-09-19 02:24 p.m.

yes

divine

i testifed that despite getting hit the vehicle did not stop

taxi 2025-09-19 02:27 p.m.

But if you refer back to the State's exhibit B, you were behind the car when the defendant started driving away, weren't you?

taxi 2025-09-19 02:29 p.m.

Or let me correct myself sorry

taxi 2025-09-19 02:29 p.m.

You were to the side of the vehicle when the defendant started driving away, weren't you?

acarlyle 2025-09-19 02:31 p.m.

Objection. Improper Lay opinion. Game mechanics aren't something that the witness can testify to. @Ocazius

acarlyle

Objection. Improper Lay opinion. Game mechanics aren't something that the witness can testify to. @Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-19 02:32 p.m.

I've not asked about game mechanics

taxi 2025-09-19 02:33 p.m.

Seeing as you've decided to object, why don't you point out the word/sentence which suggests I've asked about game mechanics @acarlyle

taxi 2025-09-19 02:33 p.m.

Go on

taxi 2025-09-19 02:33 p.m.

Do it

acarlyle 2025-09-19 02:33 p.m.

The question relates to game mechanics.

taxi 2025-09-19 02:33 p.m.

How does the witnesses location relate to game mechanics

acarlyle 2025-09-19 02:34 p.m.

Because of the hit registration on vehicles

taxi 2025-09-19 02:34 p.m.

Are you okay?

acarlyle 2025-09-19 02:35 p.m.

I am perfect, thanks for asking.

taxi 2025-09-19 02:35 p.m.

Are you mentally okay

taxi 2025-09-19 02:35 p.m.

I asked him where he was stood

taxi 2025-09-19 02:35 p.m.

That's not a game mechanic

acarlyle 2025-09-19 02:35 p.m.

I move for sanctions against defense counsel for his improper and disrespectful conduct @Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-19 02:35 p.m.

You're insufferable

acarlyle 2025-09-19 02:37 p.m.

I'm thrilled you think that way, I'll withdraw my objection since the judge isn't online rn. But I will move to strike the question and answer when he is.

I will be emphasising my motion for sanctions, cause your comments are disgusting.

taxi

You were to the side of the vehicle when the defendant started driving away, weren't you?

acarlyle 2025-09-19 02:38 p.m.

@divine

you can answer the question.

taxi

But if you refer back to the State's exhibit B, you were behind the car when the defendant started driving away, weren't you?

divine 2025-09-19 02:38 p.m.

Yes, before the defendant went inside my vehicle I was already at the driver's side panel door in an effort to prevent the theft of my vehicle.

acarlyle

I'm thrilled you think that way, I'll withdraw my objection since the judge isn't online rn. But I will move to strike the question and answer when he is. I will be emphasising m...

taxi 2025-09-19 02:38 p.m.

Cry me a river

acarlyle 2025-09-19 02:38 p.m.

Werent you complaining about "professionalism" yesterday. I can see you really do care about professionalism

taxi 2025-09-19 02:38 p.m.

You're the state, ofc you should be professional

acarlyle

I'm thrilled you think that way, I'll withdraw my objection since the judge isn't online rn. But I will move to strike the question and answer when he is. I will be emphasising m...

taxi 2025-09-19 02:39 p.m.

I'm going to wait for the Judge's ruling on the objection rather than continue

taxi 2025-09-19 02:39 p.m.

This isn't your courtroom, you don't make decisions

divine 2025-09-19 02:39 p.m.

he cant withdraw his objection ?

divine

he cant withdraw his objection ?

taxi 2025-09-19 02:40 p.m.

I'm sorry but I don't recall anyone speaking to you

taxi 2025-09-19 02:40 p.m.

You're a witness, you speak when spoken to.

acarlyle 2025-09-19 02:40 p.m.

Fine, I wont withdraw my objection then.

acarlyle 2025-09-19 02:40 p.m.

We'll wait.

Ocazius 2025-09-19 02:54 p.m.

Objection overruled

Ocazius 2025-09-19 02:55 p.m.

Motion for sanctions denied

Ocazius 2025-09-19 02:55 p.m.

Don’t be rude to each other, though.

divine

Yes, before the defendant went inside my vehicle I was already at the driver's side panel door in an effort to prevent the theft of my vehicle.

Ocazius 2025-09-19 02:55 p.m.

This answer is allowed and not stricken. @taxi next question

acarlyle 2025-09-19 02:56 p.m.

I would like an expanded ruling on why you are not imposing sanctions on an officer of this court who asked if I was "Mentally okay".

acarlyle 2025-09-19 02:56 p.m.

Especially when chamber rules dictate that counsel should respect each other, cause I certainly do not feel like opposing counsel has showed any respect at all

divine

Yes, before the defendant went inside my vehicle I was already at the driver's side panel door in an effort to prevent the theft of my vehicle.

taxi 2025-09-19 02:56 p.m.

And when you were physically hit, the car was already ahead of you, right?

acarlyle

Especially when chamber rules dictate that counsel should respect each other, cause I certainly do not feel like opposing counsel has showed any respect at all

taxi 2025-09-19 02:57 p.m.

shown*

acarlyle 2025-09-19 02:58 p.m.

I'm not really interested in your nit picking.

acarlyle 2025-09-19 02:58 p.m.

You're a disgusting vile "person"

taxi 2025-09-19 02:59 p.m.

WOAH!

taxi 2025-09-19 02:59 p.m.

Shush and stop interrupting

taxi 2025-09-19 03:00 p.m.

@divine

I apologise for the inconsiderate behaviour of opposing counsel, please answer my question.

And when you were physically hit, the car was already ahead of you, right?

taxi

@divine I apologise for the inconsiderate behaviour of opposing counsel, please answer my question. And when you were physically hit, the car was already ahead of y...

divine 2025-09-19 03:17 p.m.

When I was hit, I was still in line with the vehicle, after I got hit the vehicle was fully ahead of me.

acarlyle

I would like an expanded ruling on why you are not imposing sanctions on an officer of this court who asked if I was "Mentally okay".

Ocazius 2025-09-19 03:22 p.m.

My expanded ruling is as follows:

acarlyle

You're a disgusting vile "person"

Ocazius 2025-09-19 03:22 p.m.

Ruling over. Next question @taxi

divine

When I was hit, I was still in line with the vehicle, after I got hit the vehicle was fully ahead of me.

taxi 2025-09-19 03:24 p.m.

Could you look at the timestamp 0:13/0:22 of the State's Exhibit B and tell me once you've done so.

taxi 2025-09-19 03:24 p.m.

Here's the link https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AJYyqIXNmcTnXTIuVf6SEQusCQ4L2deb/view

lSDugjFcfvJIp8baXLb9XhR.mp4

taxi 2025-09-19 03:24 p.m.

0:12*

divine 2025-09-19 03:24 p.m.

Yes done

taxi 2025-09-19 03:24 p.m.

0:12/0:22

divine 2025-09-19 03:24 p.m.

Yes

divine

Yes done

taxi 2025-09-19 03:25 p.m.

The vehicle is ahead of you, right?

divine 2025-09-19 03:25 p.m.

At what point

divine 2025-09-19 03:25 p.m.

Can u expand the question more

taxi 2025-09-19 03:25 p.m.

At the timestamp..?

divine 2025-09-19 03:27 p.m.

at 0.12/0.13 (the moment I got hit) I was in line with the vehicle (the tail of the vehicle) AFTER 0.13 the vehicle was fully ahead of me yes

taxi 2025-09-19 03:27 p.m.

Here is a frame from the clip. You are standing, correct?

divine 2025-09-19 03:28 p.m.

Yes.

taxi 2025-09-19 03:28 p.m.

And at around this time, you were running towards the car to try and get it back, correct?

divine 2025-09-19 03:28 p.m.

Yes I was running in line with the car to try and prevent the theft of the vehicle.

divine 2025-09-19 03:28 p.m.

(As any normal person would do I suppose?)

divine 2025-09-19 03:29 p.m.

Run after your car haha

taxi

And at around this time, you were running towards the car to try and get it back, correct?

taxi 2025-09-19 03:30 p.m.

And the vehicle, as shown in the screenshot I sent, is in front of you, correct?

divine 2025-09-19 03:31 p.m.

That is the exact moment I got hit (when the driver was turning more to the left)

divine 2025-09-19 03:31 p.m.

which is why i stated the tail of the vehicle

taxi 2025-09-19 03:31 p.m.

The car was driving away from you yet you were running towards it, no?

divine 2025-09-19 03:31 p.m.

Running after it, yes sir.

taxi 2025-09-19 03:37 p.m.

@divine

You testified earlier that the defendant taking your car stopped you from carrying out callouts, correct ?

taxi 2025-09-19 03:37 p.m.

Or responding to them I mean

divine 2025-09-19 03:39 p.m.

Yes I testified earlier that due to my car being stolen I was refrained from responding to any calls, any emergencies that were in-need of such vehicle to get there.

divine

Yes I testified earlier that due to my car being stolen I was refrained from responding to any calls, any emergencies that were in-need of such vehicle to get there.

taxi 2025-09-19 03:40 p.m.

So once your car was gone, what did you do?

taxi

So once your car was gone, what did you do?

divine 2025-09-19 03:42 p.m.

I cannot re-call honestly

taxi 2025-09-19 03:43 p.m.

So to be clear, after losing your vehicle, which you say stopped from performing your duties, you can't recall what you did after?

taxi 2025-09-19 03:43 p.m.

*which you say stopped from performing your duties

taxi 2025-09-19 03:44 p.m.

It's a yes or no question

divine 2025-09-19 03:45 p.m.

I'm pretty sure it's obvious that if you cannot use your department issued vehicle to respond to any upcoming calls then yes you're impeded from responding to them

taxi 2025-09-19 03:45 p.m.

That wasn't my question.

divine 2025-09-19 03:45 p.m.

and no thats not a yes or no question

taxi 2025-09-19 03:46 p.m.

My question was after losing your vehicle, which you say stopped from performing your dutie. Yes or no?

divine

I'm pretty sure it's obvious that if you cannot use your department issued vehicle to respond to any upcoming calls then yes you're impeded from responding to them

taxi 2025-09-19 03:46 p.m.

I move to strike this @Ocazius

divine

and no thats not a yes or no question

taxi 2025-09-19 03:47 p.m.

And this

taxi

My question was after losing your vehicle, which you say stopped from performing your dutie. Yes or no?

taxi 2025-09-19 03:47 p.m.

Wait sorry

taxi

My question was after losing your vehicle, which you say stopped from performing your dutie. Yes or no?

divine 2025-09-19 03:47 p.m.

yes

taxi 2025-09-19 03:47 p.m.

My question was, after losing your vehicle, which you say stopped you from performing your duties, you said you cannot recall what you did after. Yes or no?

divine

yes

taxi 2025-09-19 03:47 p.m.

I move to strike this question and answer due to a lack of clarity as well. @Ocazius

taxi

My question was, after losing your vehicle, which you say stopped you from performing your duties, you said you cannot recall what you did after. Yes or no?

taxi 2025-09-19 03:47 p.m.

Answer this please @divine

divine 2025-09-19 03:48 p.m.

i have already answered, ill await the judges ruling upon the matter

divine 2025-09-19 03:48 p.m.

since you asked him

taxi 2025-09-19 03:48 p.m.

You answered an incomplete question

divine 2025-09-19 03:48 p.m.

no im referring to the answer you want to strike

taxi 2025-09-19 03:48 p.m.

You didn't answer MY question

divine 2025-09-19 03:48 p.m.

before that one

taxi 2025-09-19 03:49 p.m.

I'm sorry but you don't have a choice

taxi 2025-09-19 03:49 p.m.

You either answer or your entire testimoney is struck from the record

taxi 2025-09-19 03:49 p.m.

testimony *

divine 2025-09-19 03:49 p.m.

? gng thats not how it works, you asked the judge for the removal of an answer and now you want me to re-answer without the judges ruling on the question i already answered

taxi 2025-09-19 03:50 p.m.

Okay then I'll withdraw my objection and ask you to clarify that you answering "Yes" is to the following question;

"My question was, after losing your vehicle, which you say stopped you from performing your duties, you said you cannot recall what you did after. Yes or no?"

taxi 2025-09-19 03:51 p.m.

@divine

divine 2025-09-19 03:51 p.m.

my answer is the same

divine 2025-09-19 03:52 p.m.

ill await for the judge to tell me if i must re-answer the question or not

taxi 2025-09-19 03:52 p.m.

No point being difficult, you can either comply or you can have your testimony struck from the record

divine 2025-09-19 03:52 p.m.

because you're asking for the impossible without context

taxi 2025-09-19 03:52 p.m.

I summarised what you have testified to

After losing your vehicle, which you say stopped you from performing your duties, you said you cannot recall what you did after. Yes or no?

taxi 2025-09-19 03:54 p.m.

I'll give you a final chance to just answer the question, clearly, so we can continue with your cross and wrap this up.

taxi 2025-09-19 03:54 p.m.

Because either way, you're answering my questions

divine 2025-09-19 03:57 p.m.

i answered them ? you just dont like the way i answered which is your problem not mine

but in summary, yes i cannot recall exactly what i did after losing my vehicle

taxi 2025-09-19 03:57 p.m.

No? You answered "Yes" to a question that was incomplete due to a typing error from myself then refused to answer the complete question.

taxi

So to be clear, after losing your vehicle, which you say stopped from performing your duties, you can't recall what you did after?

divine 2025-09-19 03:58 p.m.

how is this an incomplete question

divine

I'm pretty sure it's obvious that if you cannot use your department issued vehicle to respond to any upcoming calls then yes you're impeded from responding to them

taxi 2025-09-19 03:58 p.m.

I ask that you strike every piece of testimony from this message

taxi 2025-09-19 03:58 p.m.

@Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-19 03:59 p.m.

The question is speaking when not asked questions, arguing, clogging up the record with useless speech which provides no material value to the case.

taxi 2025-09-19 03:59 p.m.

the witness is speaking*

taxi 2025-09-19 04:00 p.m.

I will continue once the judge returns.

divine 2025-09-19 04:00 p.m.

you asked for it not me, i told you to let the judge rule

taxi 2025-09-19 04:00 p.m.

And again, the witness is speaking out of turn.

divine

I'm pretty sure it's obvious that if you cannot use your department issued vehicle to respond to any upcoming calls then yes you're impeded from responding to them

Ocazius 2025-09-19 04:13 p.m.

Stricken

divine

and no thats not a yes or no question

Ocazius 2025-09-19 04:13 p.m.

Stricken

taxi

I move to strike this question and answer due to a lack of clarity as well. @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-09-19 04:14 p.m.

No, it was a yes or no question, he can give a one word answer.

Ocazius 2025-09-19 04:14 p.m.

@taxi

Next question.

Ocazius

No, it was a yes or no question, he can give a one word answer.

taxi 2025-09-19 04:14 p.m.

I wanted a yes or no answer but he answered yes to a mistyped question

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-19 04:27 p.m.

@taxi

Can you ask your next question please

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-19 04:27 p.m.

I am on the edge of my seat for this line of questioning.

AlbertBlackwell

I am on the edge of my seat for this line of questioning.

taxi 2025-09-19 04:27 p.m.

Riveting stuff, isn't it?

taxi 2025-09-19 04:29 p.m.

@divine

Let's move on shall we.

You testified that you recorded the clip, right?

taxi

@divine Let's move on shall we. You testified that you recorded the clip, right?

divine 2025-09-19 04:30 p.m.

Yes, the video was clipped via Medal by me.

divine

Yes, the video was clipped via Medal by me.

taxi 2025-09-19 04:38 p.m.

That's curious. The clip is 22 seconds long though, right?

acarlyle 2025-09-19 04:39 p.m.

Objection Relevance @Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-19 04:39 p.m.

Oh believe me, there is relevance.

acarlyle 2025-09-19 04:39 p.m.

What that a video is 22 seconds long?

taxi 2025-09-19 04:39 p.m.

Yes.

taxi

That's curious. The clip is 22 seconds long though, right?

divine 2025-09-19 04:41 p.m.

Yes.

taxi 2025-09-19 04:42 p.m.

@acarlyle

Are you still objecting or may I continue?

acarlyle 2025-09-19 04:42 p.m.

I’m still waiting a ruling

taxi 2025-09-19 04:42 p.m.

Sure.

taxi 2025-09-19 04:57 p.m.

@acarlyle

You literally used this witness to 'authenticate' your Exhibit B. I'm allowed to cross-examine the evidence

taxi 2025-09-19 04:58 p.m.

Stop prolonging this with frivolous objections

taxi 2025-09-19 04:58 p.m.

Can you retract or do we honestly have to wait

acarlyle 2025-09-19 04:58 p.m.

Nope, you’re gonna wait

taxi 2025-09-19 04:58 p.m.

So much for a speedy trial..

acarlyle 2025-09-19 04:59 p.m.

I didnt make any assertions for speedy trial…

taxi 2025-09-19 04:59 p.m.

Uh huh

acarlyle

Objection Relevance @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-09-20 01:57 a.m.

Overruled

Ocazius 2025-09-20 01:57 a.m.

@taxi

continue

taxi 2025-09-20 08:45 a.m.

@Ocazius

@acarlyle

@AlbertBlackwell

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_PmVDb5rM9H9SymKW9Xd-iuM6sQUl92e/view?usp=sharing

CR-154-25, Defendant, Motion for Subpoena Duces Tecum.pdf

acarlyle 2025-09-20 01:24 p.m.

All of that has been provided. Unless the Defense is making a baseless accusation

acarlyle 2025-09-20 01:25 p.m.

Or rather everything we are legally obligated to provide has been.

acarlyle 2025-09-20 01:26 p.m.

And a Subpoena mid trial is just ridiculous.

taxi 2025-09-20 01:26 p.m.

@acarlyle

Can you provide the tips submitted by the witnesses?

acarlyle

And a Subpoena mid trial is just ridiculous.

taxi 2025-09-20 01:27 p.m.

It's unorthodox, sure.

taxi

@acarlyle Can you provide the tips submitted by the witnesses?

taxi 2025-09-20 01:27 p.m.

I shouldn't even be asking.

taxi 2025-09-20 01:27 p.m.

I should already have all of this.

acarlyle 2025-09-20 01:27 p.m.

Everything we are legally obligated to provide has been.

taxi 2025-09-20 01:28 p.m.

@Ocazius

The Prosecution is with-holding evidence/

acarlyle 2025-09-20 01:29 p.m.

Your honor this is untimely. If Defense was concerned about any evidence being withheld, it should have been raised in pre-trial.

Defense Counsel not providing adequate advocacy isnt the State’s issue. We’re mid trial, I urge sanctions be imposed for his frivolous & untimely motion.

taxi 2025-09-20 01:29 p.m.

How can I be sanctioned for making a motion

taxi 2025-09-20 01:29 p.m.

I just agreed with you that it's unorthodox asking at this time, but nevertheless, the defendant is entitled to ALL evidence.

taxi 2025-09-20 01:29 p.m.

Could you please just hand it over so we may continue? Cheers!

taxi 2025-09-20 01:32 p.m.

If anything, I ought to move for sanctions against thou for prolonging this case and not just releasing what should already be released!

taxi 2025-09-20 01:34 p.m.

Maybe I report you to the Department of Justice... perhaps the State Bar.... @acarlyle

taxi 2025-09-20 01:34 p.m.

So how about it mate

acarlyle 2025-09-20 01:41 p.m.

Any issues, contact co-counsel @AlbertBlackwell as I am out tonight.

taxi

I just agreed with you that it's unorthodox asking at this time, but nevertheless, the defendant is entitled to ALL evidence.

acarlyle 2025-09-20 01:42 p.m.

This is a pre-trial issue, when you failed to raise that matter in pre-trial, you then lose your ability to raise it later in trial.

We have provided everything that we have been given & are obligated to provide. So let’s stop with the baseless accusations.

Like I say, contact my co-counsel as I’m out tonight.

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-20 01:46 p.m.

@taxi

This is a matter that should've been raised pre-trial, not while witnesses are being examined

acarlyle

This is a pre-trial issue, when you failed to raise that matter in pre-trial, you then lose your ability to raise it later in trial. We have provided everything that we have been ...

Ocazius 2025-09-20 01:54 p.m.

Is this your official response or do you wish to file a paper response?

AlbertBlackwell

@taxi This is a matter that should've been raised pre-trial, not while witnesses are being examined

taxi 2025-09-20 01:55 p.m.

Yeah I should've done it earlier but I think there is a pretty major issue in the evidence which needs looking at

Ocazius

Is this your official response or do you wish to file a paper response?

taxi 2025-09-20 01:56 p.m.

@AlbertBlackwell

Are you able to respond since Matthew is gone for tonight

Ocazius

Is this your official response or do you wish to file a paper response?

Ocazius 2025-09-20 01:57 p.m.

By your, I meant the state's.

taxi 2025-09-20 02:16 p.m.

@AlbertBlackwell

taxi 2025-09-21 08:30 a.m.

@AlbertBlackwell

@acarlyle

Does the State fancy pursuing this matter or not...?

taxi

@AlbertBlackwell

@acarlyle Does the State fancy pursuing this matter or not...?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 08:46 a.m.

I don't think that you're the arbiter for deciding what the state pursues and what it doesn't.

@Ocazius

This is wholly a pre-trial matter, the defence has failed to raise it during pre-trial and now only chooses to do it while we are still conducting examinations. The state has provided everything that it is obligated to provide the defence counsellor even admits to wanting it to be done earlier, which makes me believe they are intentionally choosing to raise this "major" issue particularly at this time.

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 08:47 a.m.

In short, this is inappropriate and untimely time to raise this subpoena - we will file a motion in opposition to it, if so necessary.

AlbertBlackwell

I don't think that you're the arbiter for deciding what the state pursues and what it doesn't. @Ocazius This is wholly a pre-trial matter, the defence has failed to ...

taxi 2025-09-21 08:53 a.m.

The judge is asking whether you're filing a written response or not

taxi 2025-09-21 08:56 a.m.

I'm just going to report you both to the Bar if you don't disclose what I've asked for.

taxi 2025-09-21 08:56 a.m.

Simple as that

taxi

The judge is asking whether you're filing a written response or not

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 08:57 a.m.

And I said we will, I am waiting for my co-counsel to return so we can discuss our options further.

taxi 2025-09-21 08:57 a.m.

Okay no worries

taxi

I'm just going to report you both to the Bar if you don't disclose what I've asked for.

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 08:58 a.m.

@Ocazius

We'd like to motion for sanctions against the defence for this comment, this is highly inappropriate for the defence to threaten us with being reported to the bar if we do not submit to his subpoena.

taxi 2025-09-21 08:58 a.m.

What threat

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 08:58 a.m.

Simply for wanting to file a motion in opposition tsk tsk

taxi 2025-09-21 08:58 a.m.

I'm going to report you to the State Bar if you don't disclose what you're required to disclose, I don't see how that's a threat...?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 08:59 a.m.

We are not immediately required to submit documents in a subpoena if we intend to oppose it..? You do understand how this works right?

taxi

I'm going to report you to the State Bar if you don't disclose what you're required to disclose, I don't see how that's a threat...?

taxi 2025-09-21 09:00 a.m.

Pursuant to Rule 3.8(d)

AlbertBlackwell

We are not immediately required to submit documents in a subpoena if we intend to oppose it..? You do understand how this works right?

taxi 2025-09-21 09:00 a.m.

Yeah you can oppose

taxi 2025-09-21 09:01 a.m.

I'm just saying what rule you'll be in violation of if you are with-holding any evidence

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 09:01 a.m.

Again, this is a "major" pre-trial matter that you've intentionally decided to delay until this moment.

taxi 2025-09-21 09:01 a.m.

It's an issue that stemed from testimony.

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 09:02 a.m.

"Yeah I should've done it earlier"

taxi 2025-09-21 09:04 a.m.

I'd like to state on record that if the State truly has fulfilled their Brady obligations then they wouldn't be so opposed to producing what I've asked for.

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 09:10 a.m.

Discovery has already closed, and the timing of your subpoena is prejudicial to proceedings by creating an unnecessary disruption. Your ineffective counsel should not be the state's problem.

taxi

I'd like to state on record that if the State truly has fulfilled their Brady obligations then they wouldn't be so opposed to producing what I've asked for.

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:14 a.m.

Or we've fulfilled our brady obligations and we have nothing else to hand over, and Defense is on a fishing expedition because of their ineffective counsel.

This is beyond preposterous, Your Honor, pulling a stunt like this mid-trial is just plainly ridiculous.

taxi 2025-09-21 10:14 a.m.

@Ocazius

I don't think they'll be submitting a paper response by the looks of it

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:14 a.m.

I think we've covered what we have to orally.

taxi 2025-09-21 10:15 a.m.

fairs

Ocazius 2025-09-21 10:22 a.m.

Would y'all like a paper or oral ruling?

Ocazius 2025-09-21 10:23 a.m.

Or will you both ask for a paper one when I rule in the other's favour?

Ocazius 2025-09-21 10:23 a.m.

I may as well write a paper one. Will take some time though.

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:24 a.m.

We'll take an oral ruling for now @Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-21 10:24 a.m.

I'm fine with oral

taxi 2025-09-21 10:24 a.m.

No matter the decision

taxi 2025-09-21 10:28 a.m.

I'd prefer oral tbh

Ocazius 2025-09-21 10:31 a.m.

@taxi

I fail to see how this isn't something you could have raised during pretrial. Now that we are in the middle of trial, I really don't see a reason to issue this order, especially as you made this filing not based upon any particular event or revelation, just randomly as if you had forgotten to do so during pretrial period...

taxi 2025-09-21 10:32 a.m.

would you like me to respond or

Ocazius 2025-09-21 10:32 a.m.

Yes please

taxi 2025-09-21 10:33 a.m.

Yeah so basically from the witness' testimony earlier, it suggests that Exhibit B has been altered

taxi 2025-09-21 10:33 a.m.

And my issue is

taxi 2025-09-21 10:33 a.m.

has the witness altered it and perjured it OR has the prosecutor altered it and thus committed a potential brady violation

taxi 2025-09-21 10:33 a.m.

perjured himself*

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:33 a.m.

Your Honor, may I?

taxi

Yeah so basically from the witness' testimony earlier, it suggests that Exhibit B has been altered

Ocazius 2025-09-21 10:33 a.m.

What suggests that Exhibit B has been altered?

acarlyle

Your Honor, may I?

Ocazius 2025-09-21 10:33 a.m.

After, not now.

taxi 2025-09-21 10:34 a.m.

Nevertheless, disclosure of initial tiplines or personal DM reports to prosecutors or LE will answer

Ocazius

What suggests that Exhibit B has been altered?

taxi 2025-09-21 10:34 a.m.

Witness testified that he recorded Exhibit B via Medal,

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:34 a.m.

Personal DMs are not disclosable, that is a CA mandate that cannot be overriden

taxi 2025-09-21 10:34 a.m.

Can you stop interrupting me

taxi 2025-09-21 10:34 a.m.

Thanks

taxi

Witness testified that he recorded Exhibit B via Medal,

Ocazius 2025-09-21 10:34 a.m.

Ignore him, continue

taxi

Witness testified that he recorded Exhibit B via Medal,

taxi 2025-09-21 10:35 a.m.

Exhibit B is 22.8 seconds long exactly, however, you cannot clip for 22.8 seconds on medal as seen here in this screenshot

taxi 2025-09-21 10:36 a.m.

So that's why I've raised an eyebrow and requested the subpoena

Ocazius 2025-09-21 10:37 a.m.

Not sure why you didn't explain and include this when you originally filed the motion but ok

taxi 2025-09-21 10:37 a.m.

To me, one of the following has occured;

1. Witness has perjured themselves and they have in fact altered their clip
2. Witness has perjured themselves and they haven't recorded using medal
3. The State has disclosed an altered version of the evidence, thus potentially commiting a brady violation

Ocazius

Not sure why you didn't explain and include this when you originally filed the motion but ok

taxi 2025-09-21 10:37 a.m.

Yeah that's mb

taxi

To me, one of the following has occured; 1. Witness has perjured themselves and they have in fact altered their clip 2. Witness has perjured themselves and they haven't recorded u...

taxi 2025-09-21 10:37 a.m.

Either way, I feel as if the material I've asked for in the motion will answer.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 10:37 a.m.

Well this seems rather compelling

Ocazius 2025-09-21 10:38 a.m.

I will now allow @acarlyle or @AlbertBlackwell to respond on behalf of the state.

taxi 2025-09-21 10:38 a.m.

I think that's all unless the prosecution brings up any points or you have questions

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:42 a.m.

Thank you.

First and foremost, as Ive already stated any Direct Messages are not discoverable per CA Mandate.

Secondly, again, we're going over the same things here. The Defense didn't object to the admission of this evidence when they should have done. This should have been something brought up in pre-trial, and then he could have objected to the admission of the State's Exhibit B when we authenticated the evidence, and later admitted it.

The Defense had no objection to its admission.

Any insinuation that the prosecution has engaged in bad-faith conduct is just beyond preposterous, and opposing counsel, is acting in bad-faith by accusing the prosecution of misconduct without a shred of credible evidence.

Since we're putting out theories, here is mine. The Defense counsel knowingly and purposely abdicated his right to object to the admission of evidence when he should have done, and has done it with the intention of bringing it up later in the trial to cause undue delays and to cause a complete nightmare for when the judge needs to review the transcript when deciding on a verdict. Which is why he is now bringing it up in the middle of his cross examination.

The State should not be getting punished or accused of bad-faith simply because the Defense Counsel is now flailing.

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:43 a.m.

The Defense has already stated that this is unorthodox, which just proves our point.

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:44 a.m.

Further to that and finally, there is no credible evidence that the Prosecution has engaged in a cover-up. We have turned over everything that we were provided, and we would have it no other way.

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:44 a.m.

I actuall have one final point, my bad.

taxi 2025-09-21 10:45 a.m.

Why would I purposefully delay my clients trial

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:45 a.m.

I also find it reprehensible that Defense Counsel is doing this now in the middle of trial when he himself advised the court of his client's speedy trial rights.

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:45 a.m.

Thats all the State has to say on this matter.

taxi 2025-09-21 10:46 a.m.

I didn't object earlier because I couldn't cross-examine...?

acarlyle

Thank you. First and foremost, as Ive already stated any Direct Messages are not discoverable per CA Mandate. Secondly, again, we're going over the same things here. The Defense ...

Ocazius 2025-09-21 10:46 a.m.

Which Central Authority Mandate do you refer to?

taxi 2025-09-21 10:46 a.m.

(Also does CA Mandate prevent disclosure of DMs regarding cases)

Ocazius

Which Central Authority Mandate do you refer to?

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:46 a.m.

I dont think its on the State code, it was mentioned in a case recently. I'll have to try and find the case

Ocazius 2025-09-21 10:47 a.m.

All central authority mandates which are officially stamped, are found on that page of the State Code.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 10:47 a.m.

Mandates enforceable to the entire player base are not privately issued in cases, but publicly announced and placed on that register...

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:48 a.m.

I cant find the case it was mentioned in, but it has been mentioned recently.

taxi 2025-09-21 10:49 a.m.

Not sure how the court can reasonably accept that if it's not on the State code

taxi 2025-09-21 10:50 a.m.

Nor can it's application be found anywhere

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:54 a.m.

Maybe the Chief Justice can shed some light seen as he is Community Moderation.

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 10:54 a.m.

I mean, you can ask Krabz - but you can't get access to DMs containing private information

taxi 2025-09-21 10:54 a.m.

Why don't you go and get your evidence

AlbertBlackwell

I mean, you can ask Krabz - but you can't get access to DMs containing private information

taxi 2025-09-21 10:55 a.m.

I'm not requesting private information though, I'm requesting communications between the State and witnesses regarding the case

taxi 2025-09-21 10:55 a.m.

Matthew is acting like I'm asking for his social security digits

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 10:56 a.m.

I mean you don't know the contents of DMs

taxi 2025-09-21 10:56 a.m.

I suppose that's the reason why I'm asking...?

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:57 a.m.

@Ocazius

Can you confirm that your ruling stands, then tell defense counsel to continue his cross. Cause Im getting bored in repeating myself.

taxi 2025-09-21 10:57 a.m.

I don't recall the judge making a ruling

acarlyle 2025-09-21 10:58 a.m.

Alright then, can you confirm that you are going to rule the same way that you were, based on what you were saying previously. Then tell Defense counsel to move on? @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-09-21 11:41 a.m.

I haven't made a ruling, I was receiving arguments...

acarlyle

I cant find the case it was mentioned in, but it has been mentioned recently.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 11:41 a.m.

So, you would like me to rule based on 'trust me bro'.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 11:41 a.m.

Interesting, coming from you...

Ocazius

So, you would like me to rule based on 'trust me bro'.

acarlyle 2025-09-21 11:42 a.m.

I literally said you can get turntable to confirm, that's not "trust me bro". And rather unprofessional coming from you.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 11:42 a.m.

Didn't really ask you to speak but ok

acarlyle 2025-09-21 11:44 a.m.

Well i was providing clarity on something that you mustn't of understood, as is my duty as counsel.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 11:44 a.m.

Didn't really ask you to speak yet again but ok

Ocazius 2025-09-21 11:45 a.m.

The inconsistencies presented during this trial regarding the video, do give me grounds to consider this unconventionally-timed motion in a lightful manner, however I will do a bit of research into what I can compel the state to disclose within the limits of central authority. However, the fact that not one mandate discusses this, and that others have stated that CA will not involve itself with judicial affairs, will also factor into that.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 11:45 a.m.

I will rule later today, once I have done so.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 11:48 a.m.

@acarlyle

@AlbertBlackwell

'Any and all communications regarding the case between the State (Including law enforcement entities and Prosecutors) and all witnesses, including but not limited to communications concerning witness interviews, discussion of evidence or preservation of evidence.'

Was any information/communication included in the above, initiated via direct message DMs? Or was it all in a DoJ server ticket/channel?(edited)

acarlyle 2025-09-21 11:53 a.m.

It was all in DOJ Server ticket

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 11:53 a.m.

Which contains privileged information.

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 11:53 a.m.

@Ocazius

acarlyle 2025-09-21 11:55 a.m.

And nontheless, as we have stated many times. The Defense intentionally abdicated their objection over this. You should not be allowing him to muddy the waters, and to delay this trial because he has failed in his advocacy.

taxi 2025-09-21 11:56 a.m.

How many times have I said that I'm making this objection as a result of later testimony

taxi 2025-09-21 11:56 a.m.

I didn't have any problems with the admission of Exhibit B at the start because I didn't cross-examine the witness yet

taxi

Yeah I should've done it earlier but I think there is a pretty major issue in the evidence which needs looking at

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 11:56 a.m.

You stated earlier this:

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 11:57 a.m.

How can you say that you should've done it earlier, if you're bringing it up as a result of testimony?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 11:57 a.m.

That doesn't make any sense.

taxi 2025-09-21 11:57 a.m.

Yeah I should've motioned for the subpoena early but I've already explained why I'm interrupting the trial and making it now.

taxi 2025-09-21 11:57 a.m.

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 11:57 a.m.

So you were aware of it before trial anyway? And now you're choosing to waste the court's time by interrupting the trial?

taxi 2025-09-21 11:58 a.m.

I apologise for making the motion so late but I didn't think to do it earlier and I wouldn't have done it now till I found discrepencies

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 11:58 a.m.

This form of conduct is unacceptable

AlbertBlackwell

This form of conduct is unacceptable

taxi 2025-09-21 11:58 a.m.

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 11:58 a.m.

You said you were already aware of the discrepancies, you purposely filed this late for some unbeknownst reason.

taxi 2025-09-21 11:59 a.m.

When did i say that

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 11:59 a.m.

Look at what you stated previous and tell the court that that isn't what you meant.

taxi 2025-09-21 11:59 a.m.

how could I have already been aware if I only knew that the clip was recorded on medal when i cross examined divinemissle

AlbertBlackwell

Which contains privileged information.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 11:59 a.m.

How so?

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:00 p.m.

Also guys stop crosstalking between each other: you make your arguments to me, not each other.

Ocazius

How so?

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:01 p.m.

Contains our legal strategy

Ocazius

How so?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 12:02 p.m.

It's complicated, but when a ticket is made by an investigator - the entire case is discussed within that channel including legal strategies, advice etc.

taxi 2025-09-21 12:03 p.m.

Your Honour, I don't care about their legal strategies, they can blur that bit out.

taxi 2025-09-21 12:03 p.m.

But the State must've received the tip via forms or DMs to prosecutors/investigators

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:03 p.m.

Sorry, but that would involve us editing evidence. Since you've made it clear that you dont like that, we wont be doing that.

taxi 2025-09-21 12:04 p.m.

How are legal strategies evidence

taxi

But the State must've received the tip via forms or DMs to prosecutors/investigators

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 12:04 p.m.

That ticket channel is from the investigators

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:04 p.m.

You want us to disclose our ticket channel as evidence?

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:04 p.m.

Which means anything within will be evidence?

taxi 2025-09-21 12:05 p.m.

Stop making arguments to me

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:05 p.m.

You literally asked how are legal strategies are evidence

taxi 2025-09-21 12:06 p.m.

Can you stop addressing me directly when making arguments

taxi 2025-09-21 12:06 p.m.

Thanks

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:08 p.m.

# STOP CROSSTALKING WITH EACH OTHER FOR THE LAST TIME

acarlyle

Contains our legal strategy

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:08 p.m.

You discuss legal strategy with witnesses?

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:08 p.m.

Witnesses arent in the ticket channel.

AlbertBlackwell

It's complicated, but when a ticket is made by an investigator - the entire case is discussed within that channel including legal strategies, advice etc.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:08 p.m.

Oh interesting

acarlyle

Witnesses arent in the ticket channel.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:08 p.m.

Oh right, explain this to me

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:08 p.m.

The ticket channel is between DOJ & investigators, which is what the Defense wants disclosing.

taxi 2025-09-21 12:09 p.m.

It is not, your honour.

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:09 p.m.

Unless Im misunderstanding?

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:09 p.m.

Ah I see, so presumably its a bot that sends you the message from the tip

taxi

It is not, your honour.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:09 p.m.

Do you have evidence of this?

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:09 p.m.

Oh sorry you are saying that is not what you want disclosing

taxi 2025-09-21 12:09 p.m.

Mhm

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:09 p.m.

Based on this information, could you clarify what specifically you are requesting to be disclosed?

Ocazius

Ah I see, so presumably its a bot that sends you the message from the tip

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:10 p.m.

Yes we get a tip from LEOs with the AOPC. Which is exactly what defense was after.

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 12:10 p.m.

I'll explain briefly, an investigative agency comes to us with an AOPC - it is then assigned to an attorney and reviewed, then further discussions are held relating to the case at hand.

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 12:10 p.m.

Such tickets could include covert and other law enforcement tactics.

taxi 2025-09-21 12:10 p.m.

- Communications regarding the case between the State and witnesses
- Tiplines or reports from witnesses to the State

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:10 p.m.

@taxi

In your motion, you request communication between state and witnesses

taxi 2025-09-21 12:10 p.m.

Yeah

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:11 p.m.

Yeah, the state has just told the court that the DoJ case channel does not include a witness

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:11 p.m.

so it's irrelevant

taxi 2025-09-21 12:11 p.m.

Yes

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:11 p.m.

@AlbertBlackwell

Did the state at any time, talk to any witnesses?

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:11 p.m.

and where was this done

Ocazius

@taxi In your motion, you request communication between state and witnesses

taxi 2025-09-21 12:12 p.m.

Law Enforcement bodies may be the ones who got the tip from the witnesses

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:13 p.m.

I'd like the state to list every communication and in what form that communication was, with witnesses on their discovery list.

Ocazius

@AlbertBlackwell Did the state at any time, talk to any witnesses?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 12:13 p.m.

Only to the extent of whether they will testify or not.

Ocazius

and where was this done

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 12:13 p.m.

My co-counsel's direct messages, your honour.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:14 p.m.

Alright, and would I be correct in asserting that the points covered in the second bulletpoint of the motion, are all in a singular mesage sent by a bot which appeared at the beginning of your case channel?

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:15 p.m.

Because if so, that requires no further exposure of privileged material relating to case strategy...

Ocazius

Alright, and would I be correct in asserting that the points covered in the second bulletpoint of the motion, are all in a singular mesage sent by a bot which appeared at the begin...

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:17 p.m.

The way that our cases start are as follows:

1. The investigator clicks on a button in one of the DOJ channels, the input specific information which includes: Defendant's name, AOPC, Investigators Name & Agency, Date of the Offense & Offenses that are recommended.
2. A magical occurrence happens, in which an algorithm translates that into another channel, which gives us a pop up of the information that the Investigator has inputted.
3. It tags our Criminal Screening role, who then make sure we have the information we need.
4. A prosecutor then gets tagged, which notifies them that they have a new case to lead.

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:17 p.m.

they input*

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 12:18 p.m.

Then further work is conducted within that relating to the information on the tipline.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:22 p.m.

I see

acarlyle

The way that our cases start are as follows: 1. The investigator clicks on a button in one of the DOJ channels, the input specific information which includes: Defendant's name, AO...

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:22 p.m.

And where exactly was the link to the evidence gained?

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:22 p.m.

As in the google drive link?

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:23 p.m.

yes - where did you encounter it? in the message popup of the investigator's submission?

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:23 p.m.

No, the evidence is all included in the AOPC

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:23 p.m.

or in the AOPC

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:23 p.m.

Any evidence is all included in the AOPC

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:24 p.m.

Alright, so you are stating that all evidence submitted during discovery are the exact links and files that were in the AoPC submitted to you?

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:24 p.m.

Correct Your Honor.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:24 p.m.

And did you follow up by talking to the recorder of the evidence?

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:24 p.m.

We did not speak to the witness in regards to the actual evidence. Prior to trial, no.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:26 p.m.

Alright

taxi 2025-09-21 12:26 p.m.

If I may your honour, I suggest that the Prosecution speak with the relevant investigative body to communicate how they got the tips

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:27 p.m.

I think its clear as to how the tip was received? it will have been filed in their google forms tipline by the victims.

taxi 2025-09-21 12:27 p.m.

Great! Then it can easily be submitted?

taxi 2025-09-21 12:27 p.m.

And we can see in what form the evidence has been acquired

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:28 p.m.

@acarlyle

And witness interviews?

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:28 p.m.

The evidence is routinely uploaded to google drive by investigators at the request of DOJ Superiors to prevent the evidence going missing because of the Medal timelimits

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:28 p.m.

how many were conducted

Ocazius

@acarlyle And witness interviews?

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:28 p.m.

As far as I am aware, none were conducted.

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:29 p.m.

Otherwise they would be included in the discovery, because as much as defense wants it to be true, I dont hide evidence.

taxi 2025-09-21 12:29 p.m.

No need for snarky comments

taxi 2025-09-21 12:30 p.m.

Just go ask whoever this is

taxi 2025-09-21 12:30 p.m.

How they got the evidence

taxi 2025-09-21 12:31 p.m.

Probably Mattheias

taxi 2025-09-21 12:31 p.m.

the affiant

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:31 p.m.

@taxi

If you want to challenge the authenticity of evidence for practical purposes, or to cast legal doubt into the usefullness of it in my mind when it comes to ruling on the case, then you may do so during testimony. However, the State has just informed myself of the nature of how tips and evidence is received. For your first point in your motion, discussion of evidence between the state and witnesses, is non existant, as the state has informed the court that no discussions regarding the evidence links were discussed with witnesses. As for the point on witness interviews, it seems that they conducted none.

As for the second point, I don't believe it is necessary for the court to compel the disclosure of a message containing an AoPC and CC which have been uploaded to this court already. Thus, I will be ruling against this Motion for Subpoena Duces Tecum in full, and will enter it later.

taxi 2025-09-21 12:32 p.m.

Will the State be compelled to speak to their investigators to show the origin of their Exhibits?

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:32 p.m.

If your primary point is that the evidence has been edited, then establish this. I will not entertain the extra-testimony action of investigating the Justice Department for editing the evidence, based on the facts provided to me.

taxi

Will the State be compelled to speak to their investigators to show the origin of their Exhibits?

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:33 p.m.

You did not include this in the motion which was denied in full, so you may move for that if you wish to.

taxi 2025-09-21 12:33 p.m.

I moved for the disclosure of tiplines in their possession

taxi 2025-09-21 12:33 p.m.

Sorry for not making it clear

taxi 2025-09-21 12:33 p.m.

I did also mean

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:33 p.m.

We are calling our investigator to the stand later in trial. He can challenge that in cross, no? @Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-21 12:34 p.m.

Any that the cops got

acarlyle

We are calling our investigator to the stand later in trial. He can challenge that in cross, no? @Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-21 12:34 p.m.

I can't rely on this

taxi

Any that the cops got

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:35 p.m.

I will not be compelling that

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:35 p.m.

It is irrelevant

taxi 2025-09-21 12:35 p.m.

1. You could change your mind.
2. It may not be relevant later but it is relevant now as we're discussing exhibit B

acarlyle

We are calling our investigator to the stand later in trial. He can challenge that in cross, no? @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:35 p.m.

he can indeed, this should be his channel of doing so

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:35 p.m.

Thank you Your Honor.

taxi

1. You could change your mind. 2. It may not be relevant later but it is relevant now as we're discussing exhibit B

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:35 p.m.

How is the tipline of a law enforcement department, relevant?

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:36 p.m.

All of these things should be challenged during testimony, in your aim to prove to myself that the state cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that your client did not commit actions alleged of him.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:36 p.m.

That is your forum of doing so.

Ocazius

How is the tipline of a law enforcement department, relevant?

taxi 2025-09-21 12:36 p.m.

Exhibit B didn't just magically appear in the affidavit, they got it one way or another and I just want to know if we truly have the most original piece of evidence

taxi 2025-09-21 12:37 p.m.

if their exhibit B

taxi 2025-09-21 12:37 p.m.

Which they got via tip

taxi 2025-09-21 12:37 p.m.

Is 30 seconds then the State/investigators have altered the video

If the exhibit they got via the tip is 22 seconds long then the witness has perjured themselves

taxi 2025-09-21 12:37 p.m.

And carrying on would be of huge prejudice to the defendant

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 12:37 p.m.

Your honour is asking how it is relevant.

taxi

Exhibit B didn't just magically appear in the affidavit, they got it one way or another and I just want to know if we truly have the most original piece of evidence

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:37 p.m.

You can question that during testimony

taxi 2025-09-21 12:37 p.m.

I just explained

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:38 p.m.

Why would I compel this at this point in time

taxi 2025-09-21 12:38 p.m.

Because continuing would prejudice my client since we'd have the testimony of a perjurer on the record

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 12:38 p.m.

Your honour, this is wasting precious time - may we disregard this matter and return to the trial.

taxi 2025-09-21 12:38 p.m.

The witness has stated that they've not altered the video yet the video was recorded using medal and it's 22 seconds long

taxi 2025-09-21 12:39 p.m.

I don't see how we can just brush past this

taxi 2025-09-21 12:39 p.m.

Either the witness is lying or the State has altered evidence

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:39 p.m.

Your honor, can we get moving on?

taxi 2025-09-21 12:39 p.m.

And if the witness is lying,

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:39 p.m.

The Justice Department, the representing party in this case, has assured me that this evidence has not been altered, and I have found so. If you want to allege that another party has altered evidence, you do so during questioning.

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:39 p.m.

We are moving on, sorry.

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:40 p.m.

There is a reason why cross examination is used for impeachment purposes, if the Defense counsel cannot impeach the witness adequately, it is assumed that the witnesses testimony is truthful

taxi 2025-09-21 12:40 p.m.

Then I'd like to move to strike Exhibit B from the record and the entirety of DivineMissile's testimony.

Would the court like this in writing?

taxi 2025-09-21 12:40 p.m.

ON grounds of perjury

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 12:42 p.m.

The defence is clearly trying to buy for whatever little time he has left, why bring up all these motions now?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 12:42 p.m.

These are all issues that should've been addressed during pre-trial

taxi 2025-09-21 12:42 p.m.

Do I have to mention the fact that this issue has risen out of testimony for the hundredth time

taxi 2025-09-21 12:43 p.m.

Or can you acknowledge why I've brought this up

taxi

Then I'd like to move to strike Exhibit B from the record and the entirety of DivineMissile's testimony. Would the court like this in writing?

taxi 2025-09-21 12:43 p.m.

@Ocazius

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:43 p.m.

Can you clarify how many more evidentiary filings you're going to make?

taxi 2025-09-21 12:44 p.m.

acarlyle 2025-09-21 12:44 p.m.

This is getting ridiculous

taxi 2025-09-21 12:44 p.m.

Is it

taxi

Then I'd like to move to strike Exhibit B from the record and the entirety of DivineMissile's testimony. Would the court like this in writing?

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:44 p.m.

Is this singular sentence the basis that I'm meant to be reviewing in order to make a ruling on this?

taxi 2025-09-21 12:45 p.m.

No no

taxi 2025-09-21 12:45 p.m.

I'm asking if you'd like it in writing

taxi 2025-09-21 12:45 p.m.

Or whether

taxi 2025-09-21 12:45 p.m.

Oral arguments are okay

Ocazius 2025-09-21 12:45 p.m.

It's your decision... If you're happy with that one sentence, you may not be happy with my ruling...

taxi 2025-09-21 12:45 p.m.

I'll provide it in writing

taxi 2025-09-21 12:46 p.m.

Actually

taxi 2025-09-21 12:46 p.m.

For now

taxi 2025-09-21 12:46 p.m.

I'm going to continue my cross examination

taxi 2025-09-21 12:46 p.m.

@divine

Hello, let's resume.

You testified that you recorded the clip via Medal, right?

taxi 2025-09-21 12:49 p.m.

I'd also like to remind you that you are under oath.

taxi 2025-09-21 02:01 p.m.

@divine

divine 2025-09-21 05:59 p.m.

Yes

divine

Yes

taxi 2025-09-21 06:29 p.m.

On medal, you can’t clip a clip for 22 seconds which is how long a medal clip is, so did you clip a longer piece of evidence and cut the video?

taxi 2025-09-21 06:29 p.m.

Sorry let me rephrase

taxi 2025-09-21 06:31 p.m.

On Medal, you can’t make a 22 second clip, which is how long Exhibit B is, which is you said you recorded using medal.

So you must’ve recorded a longer clip and trimmed the length, right?

@divine

taxi

On Medal, you can’t make a 22 second clip, which is how long Exhibit B is, which is you said you recorded using medal. So you must’ve recorded a longer clip and trimmed the length...

divine 2025-09-21 06:31 p.m.

No sir.

taxi 2025-09-21 06:32 p.m.

So the State edited it?

taxi

So the State edited it?

divine 2025-09-21 06:37 p.m.

That I'm not aware of, but allow me to explain as I see you are a bit confused.

There is a feature on Medal where you can manually start recording and end, or with Medal's own choice of wording "Full Session Recording" by holding down a key and then holding it down again to end it.

The reason you may have seemed to think it was one of those ordinary clips with a set duration is because I did literally say "clip" without expanding more on it, but it is classified as a "clip" as medal says just a different method of doing so.

The video you are seeing has not been touched at all and is fully original.

taxi 2025-09-21 06:37 p.m.

Sorry, a full session recording?

divine 2025-09-21 06:38 p.m.

I apologize for the confusion.

divine 2025-09-21 06:38 p.m.

Yes, sir.

taxi 2025-09-21 06:38 p.m.

So when did you start this full session recording?

taxi 2025-09-21 06:41 p.m.

I don’t need entire wiki articles

divine 2025-09-21 06:42 p.m.

Yes yes sorry I just want to make sure you understand

taxi

So when did you start this full session recording?

divine 2025-09-21 06:42 p.m.

I started this session when I noticed the defendant starting to walk up to me/my vehicle. The particular reason I started the session is because I had witnessed the defendant move other vehicles.

Now I just want to note that a full session recording doesn't equal that your entire session is recorded, only when you start one.

Also I just wanted to fix the term back there after re-checking, it's called enable long press to start recording WHICH is classified as a "session".

divine 2025-09-21 06:46 p.m.

Now even without you asking I'm sure you have your own ideas of why I do this

Well I have a crappy laptop so recording gameplay 24/7 whilst on a really unoptimized game makes me sometimes experience fps drops when loading in new content or map however you say it. That's why I use that feature instead

taxi

So the State edited it?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 06:48 p.m.

Objection, assumes facts not evidence..

@Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-21 06:49 p.m.

Withdrawn

taxi 2025-09-21 06:50 p.m.

@divine

Medal clips usually have watermarks, right?

taxi 2025-09-21 06:50 p.m.

Yes or no please

divine 2025-09-21 06:50 p.m.

Uh idk tbf i havent really checked much into that

divine

Uh idk tbf i havent really checked much into that

taxi 2025-09-21 06:51 p.m.

They do.

So I’d like to ask how your clip doesn’t have a medal watermark if you used medal?

divine 2025-09-21 06:52 p.m.

I would have no idea, but I can assure you that the video is from medal

divine

That I'm not aware of, but allow me to explain as I see you are a bit confused. There is a feature on Medal where you can manually start recording and end, or with Medal's own cho...

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 06:52 p.m.

@Ocazius

We motion to have this answer struck from the record, see previous transcript here

https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1413244199289225296/1419455386510954537

divine

I would have no idea, but I can assure you that the video is from medal

taxi 2025-09-21 06:53 p.m.

So you used medal, clips on medal have watermarks but somehow this particular clip doesn’t?

divine 2025-09-21 06:53 p.m.

Im not medal expert..

taxi

So you used medal, clips on medal have watermarks but somehow this particular clip doesn’t?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 06:53 p.m.

@Ocazius

Objection witness is not an expert on video clipping software.

taxi 2025-09-21 06:54 p.m.

I’ve not asked him for expert opinion, I’m asking him to confirm his testimony

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 06:54 p.m.

Argue that with the judge not me

taxi 2025-09-21 06:55 p.m.

Or you could just withdraw your frivolous objection so I can continue

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-21 06:55 p.m.

No thanks, I’ll wait for a ruling

AlbertBlackwell

@Ocazius We motion to have this answer struck from the record, see previous transcript here https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1413244199289225296/1419...

Ocazius 2025-09-22 03:15 a.m.

So struck.

AlbertBlackwell

@Ocazius Objection witness is not an expert on video clipping software.

Ocazius 2025-09-22 03:15 a.m.

Overruled, witness previously testified that he used medal so he doesn't need to be an expert to understand the software and its basic customer functions.

Ocazius 2025-09-22 03:15 a.m.

@taxi

Continue.

taxi

So you used medal, clips on medal have watermarks but somehow this particular clip doesn’t?

taxi 2025-09-22 10:22 a.m.

Answer please @divine

taxi

So you used medal, clips on medal have watermarks but somehow this particular clip doesn’t?

divine 2025-09-22 11:03 a.m.

So after some test, a watermark won't appear if you are on medal's website (you can also download clips from medal's website and a watermark won't appear). But if you try looking at a clip from a link or externally/outside medal's website (except in the cases the clip was directly downloaded from medal's site) a water mark will appear

You can try this yourself if you want

divine

So after some test, a watermark won't appear if you are on medal's website (you can also download clips from medal's website and a watermark won't appear). But if you try looking a...

taxi 2025-09-22 11:11 a.m.

You don't have medal premium, do you?

divine 2025-09-22 11:11 a.m.

taxi 2025-09-22 11:12 a.m.

The only way to download a medal clip with a watermark on medal is if you have medal premium.

taxi 2025-09-22 11:12 a.m.

So,

divine 2025-09-22 11:12 a.m.

thats cap

divine 2025-09-22 11:12 a.m.

have u even tried

taxi 2025-09-22 11:12 a.m.

Sorry, you're not the one asking questions

divine 2025-09-22 11:12 a.m.

? so youre lying

divine

thats cap

taxi 2025-09-22 11:12 a.m.

I move to strike this and the message below @Ocazius

divine

? so youre lying

taxi 2025-09-22 11:13 a.m.

And this

taxi

The only way to download a medal clip with a watermark on medal is if you have medal premium.

divine 2025-09-22 11:13 a.m.

bring down a expert to check this g

taxi

The only way to download a medal clip with a watermark on medal is if you have medal premium.

divine 2025-09-22 11:16 a.m.

yknow wat bro this might be true

i just want to note for the record that i wasnt the one who downloaded the clip that was sent here, i only sent my medal link

so its possible whoever downloaded the video may have premium

taxi

I move to strike this and the message below @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-09-22 11:18 a.m.

Stricken

divine

bring down a expert to check this g

taxi 2025-09-22 11:18 a.m.

I move to strike this

taxi

And this

Ocazius 2025-09-22 11:18 a.m.

stricken

divine

yknow wat bro this might be true i just want to note for the record that i wasnt the one who downloaded the clip that was sent here, i only sent my medal link so its possible wh...

taxi 2025-09-22 11:18 a.m.

and this

divine

bring down a expert to check this g

Ocazius 2025-09-22 11:18 a.m.

stricken

divine

So after some test, a watermark won't appear if you are on medal's website (you can also download clips from medal's website and a watermark won't appear). But if you try looking a...

divine 2025-09-22 11:18 a.m.

i retract this if possible, seems after double checking it not true

taxi 2025-09-22 11:19 a.m.

@Ocazius

I also ask that you issue a formal warning to the witness for continiously talking when not asked a question

taxi 2025-09-22 11:19 a.m.

It's multiple occasions now

Ocazius 2025-09-22 11:19 a.m.

@divine

Just answer questions pls, ty

taxi 2025-09-22 11:20 a.m.

Thanks

Ocazius

@divine Just answer questions pls, ty

divine 2025-09-22 11:20 a.m.

can i retract that

divine 2025-09-22 11:20 a.m.

btw

divine 2025-09-22 11:20 a.m.

i dont want to purjure myself

taxi 2025-09-22 11:21 a.m.

@divine

The only way to download a medal clip with a watermark on medal is if you have medal premium.

So, how did you get a clip without a watermark?

divine 2025-09-22 11:21 a.m.

so its possible whoever downloaded the video may have premium

divine 2025-09-22 11:22 a.m.

@taxi

acarlyle 2025-09-22 11:24 a.m.

Objection, confusing & irrelevant. Move to strike the answer.

Defense said "only way to download a medal clip with a watermark" ... "is if you have medal premium". Witness testified to not having premium. So no watermark would be present... @Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-22 11:24 a.m.

@divine

How did you report the defendant?

taxi 2025-09-22 11:24 a.m.

Wait

taxi 2025-09-22 11:24 a.m.

Withdrawn

taxi

@divine The only way to download a medal clip with a watermark on medal is if you have medal premium. So, how did you get a clip without a watermark?

taxi 2025-09-22 11:25 a.m.

I retract this and also move to strike the answer

taxi 2025-09-22 11:25 a.m.

I'm going to reask it, thanks for the catch counsellor.

taxi 2025-09-22 11:25 a.m.

@divine

The only way to download a medal clip WITHOUT a watermark on medal is if you have medal premium.

So, how did you submit a clip without a watermark?

acarlyle 2025-09-22 11:27 a.m.

Assumes facts not in evidence. @Ocazius

acarlyle 2025-09-22 11:27 a.m.

Counsel is assuming that the witness submitted this clip without a watermark. Yet there is no evidence to suggest that this is the case.

taxi 2025-09-22 11:28 a.m.

He submitted a clip

I'm asking whether it's with a watermark or not

taxi 2025-09-22 11:28 a.m.

He can answer the question

Ocazius 2025-09-22 11:29 a.m.

@taxi

Where has it been established that the only way to download a medal clip WITHOUT a watermark on medal is if you have medal premium?

taxi 2025-09-22 11:30 a.m.

Withdrawn

taxi 2025-09-22 11:31 a.m.

@divine

As a user of Medal, to the best of your knowledge, can you install medal clips without a watermark if you don't have medal?

taxi 2025-09-22 11:31 a.m.

not install sorry

taxi 2025-09-22 11:31 a.m.

download*

divine 2025-09-22 11:31 a.m.

idk, i havent really looked into watermarks that much with medal

divine 2025-09-22 11:31 a.m.

maybe medal support could help ?

acarlyle 2025-09-22 11:32 a.m.

Can counsel re-ask and clarify the question in full plese.

acarlyle 2025-09-22 11:32 a.m.

please*

acarlyle 2025-09-22 11:32 a.m.

nvm, ignore me

taxi 2025-09-22 11:32 a.m.

No, stop interrupting.

taxi 2025-09-22 11:33 a.m.

@divine

In your experience of using medal, have clips that you have downloaded/uploaded had watermarks?

divine 2025-09-22 11:34 a.m.

ive never downloaded a clip so idk about that part

regarding uploads if you watch the clip on the medal website it doesnt appear

taxi 2025-09-22 11:34 a.m.

Who did you report the defendant to when the incident in question allegedly occured?

taxi 2025-09-22 11:35 a.m.

@divine

divine 2025-09-22 11:35 a.m.

i believe mbi

divine

i believe mbi

taxi 2025-09-22 11:36 a.m.

So you're not sure?

divine 2025-09-22 11:36 a.m.

i dont think i said that

taxi 2025-09-22 11:36 a.m.

It's a pretty straight forward question

divine 2025-09-22 11:36 a.m.

i said i believe mbi, like to my knowledge

taxi 2025-09-22 11:37 a.m.

And you submitted the clip to them?

divine 2025-09-22 11:37 a.m.

well an agent of mbi

divine

well an agent of mbi

taxi 2025-09-22 11:38 a.m.

You DMed an agent?

divine 2025-09-22 11:38 a.m.

no no, an agent reached out to me regarding the incident and he told me to send in evidence

divine 2025-09-22 11:39 a.m.

as he had witnessed it i suppose

divine 2025-09-22 11:39 a.m.

and wanted to make sure justice was served

divine

as he had witnessed it i suppose

taxi 2025-09-22 11:39 a.m.

Could you elaborate on this? Wdym he had witnessed it?

acarlyle 2025-09-22 11:39 a.m.

Compound

acarlyle 2025-09-22 11:40 a.m.

@Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-22 11:40 a.m.

Withdrawn

divine

as he had witnessed it i suppose

taxi 2025-09-22 11:40 a.m.

Could you elaborate on this statement?

divine 2025-09-22 11:40 a.m.

idk how else to elaborate on dat

taxi 2025-09-22 11:40 a.m.

Well for a start, it doesn't make sense. What did he witness?

divine 2025-09-22 11:40 a.m.

well im not sure i just supposed he did since he reached out to me

divine 2025-09-22 11:40 a.m.

i cannot speak

divine 2025-09-22 11:41 a.m.

for what he saw

taxi 2025-09-22 11:41 a.m.

You just said he witnessed something, what coud he have witnessed...?

taxi 2025-09-22 11:41 a.m.

could*

divine 2025-09-22 11:41 a.m.

the defendant breaking into vehicles ?

taxi 2025-09-22 11:41 a.m.

What's the name of the MBI Agent which DMed you?

taxi

Well for a start, it doesn't make sense. What did he witness?

acarlyle 2025-09-22 11:42 a.m.

Move to strike question & answer for speculation. @Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-22 11:42 a.m.

He said he witnessed it

taxi 2025-09-22 11:42 a.m.

I asked what is it

taxi 2025-09-22 11:42 a.m.

Then he said he's not sure

taxi 2025-09-22 11:42 a.m.

There's no speculative answer

acarlyle 2025-09-22 11:42 a.m.

Sure, but he cant speak to what he witnessed exactly.

acarlyle 2025-09-22 11:43 a.m.

which is what you're asking him to do

taxi 2025-09-22 11:43 a.m.

He can testify to his first hand experience

taxi 2025-09-22 11:43 a.m.

Frivolous objection

acarlyle

Sure, but he cant speak to what he witnessed exactly.

Ocazius 2025-09-22 11:47 a.m.

Then he shouldn't have stated that the agent witnessed 'it'. So I will sustain the objection, strike that answer, but also strike the previous answer 'as he had witnessed it i suppose'.

taxi 2025-09-22 11:47 a.m.

@divine

What's the name of the MBI Agent which DMed you?

divine 2025-09-22 11:51 a.m.

section or something

divine

section or something

taxi 2025-09-22 11:53 a.m.

How did you initially report the defendant?

divine 2025-09-22 11:53 a.m.

i just sent evidence and let them do the rest

divine

i just sent evidence and let them do the rest

taxi 2025-09-22 11:53 a.m.

Did you use a tipline?

divine 2025-09-22 11:54 a.m.

like i said an agent reached out to me

divine 2025-09-22 11:54 a.m.

regarding the incident

taxi 2025-09-22 11:54 a.m.

So let me get this straight,

You didn't directly report the defendant but rather an MBI Agent DMed you?

divine 2025-09-22 11:56 a.m.

yes he asked me if i had any evidence so that i could take action

taxi 2025-09-22 11:56 a.m.

I see.

taxi 2025-09-22 11:57 a.m.

@divine

And when you sent him the evidence, did you upload a file or send a link?

divine 2025-09-22 11:57 a.m.

sent a link

divine

sent a link

taxi 2025-09-22 11:58 a.m.

And was that a medal link?

divine 2025-09-22 11:58 a.m.

yes

taxi 2025-09-22 11:58 a.m.

And does that medal link have a watermark?

taxi 2025-09-22 11:58 a.m.

When you watch the video from discord

taxi 2025-09-22 11:58 a.m.

using embed

taxi 2025-09-22 11:59 a.m.

or wtv

divine 2025-09-22 11:59 a.m.

well yes

divine 2025-09-22 12:00 p.m.

i think all videos do but im not 100%

taxi 2025-09-22 12:00 p.m.

Interesting, indeed.

taxi 2025-09-22 12:00 p.m.

@divine

What did the MBI Agent say to you when they first DMed you regarding the incident?

divine 2025-09-22 12:01 p.m.

i cannot recall at this time

taxi 2025-09-22 12:01 p.m.

Then check your DMs.

taxi 2025-09-22 12:01 p.m.

with him

divine 2025-09-22 12:02 p.m.

ok hold on

taxi

@divine What did the MBI Agent say to you when they first DMed you regarding the incident?

divine 2025-09-22 12:03 p.m.

He said thank you

divine 2025-09-22 12:04 p.m.

or literally "ty"

taxi 2025-09-22 12:04 p.m.

That's a bit strange.

Their first DM with you about the incident is to thank you?

divine 2025-09-22 12:04 p.m.

Well u asked wat they said first

taxi 2025-09-22 12:05 p.m.

Yeah, what did they say first about the incident

divine 2025-09-22 12:05 p.m.

He say ty

acarlyle 2025-09-22 12:05 p.m.

ASked and answered @Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-22 12:05 p.m.

The witness is being difficult on purpose

acarlyle 2025-09-22 12:05 p.m.

If we keep asking the same questions over and over, we're going to get nowhere

taxi 2025-09-22 12:05 p.m.

@divine

So the MBI agent DMed you out the blue and said thank you?

divine 2025-09-22 12:06 p.m.

No he contacted me ingame to dm him on discord and then when I contacted him he said thank u

taxi 2025-09-22 12:07 p.m.

Alright.

taxi 2025-09-22 12:07 p.m.

I have no further questions. @Ocazius

@acarlyle

Ocazius 2025-09-22 12:25 p.m.

Alright

Ocazius 2025-09-22 12:26 p.m.

I'm not doing rebs

Ocazius 2025-09-22 12:26 p.m.

@acarlyle

Call your next witness

acarlyle 2025-09-22 12:30 p.m.

We call @SECTION

@Ocazius

Ocazius used

/add

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-22 02:48 p.m.

Case Modified

@Ocazius

has added @SECTION to the case channel.

Ocazius 2025-09-22 02:48 p.m.

hi @SECTION

Ocazius used

/administeroath

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-22 02:48 p.m.

@SECTION

(edited)

Oath Selection

Which type of oath would you like to swear to?

Religious

- Involves swearing to god that your testimony is, or will be, truthful.

Non-Religious

- Solemnly affirms that your testimony is, or will be, truthful, under the pains and penalties of perjury.

Religious Oath

Non-Religious Oath

BotclerkFlow

@SECTION

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-22 03:11 p.m.

@SECTION

Religious Oath

Do you solemnly swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, so help you god?

SECTION 2025-09-22 03:12 p.m.

Yes, I do.

SECTION 2025-09-22 03:13 p.m.

@Ocazius

Good evening, Your Honor.

taxi 2025-09-22 03:21 p.m.

@acarlyle

Get a move on

taxi

@acarlyle Get a move on

Ocazius 2025-09-22 03:23 p.m.

No need

taxi 2025-09-22 03:23 p.m.

My bad

SECTION 2025-09-22 03:23 p.m.

Good evening @taxi

taxi 2025-09-22 03:23 p.m.

Hi.

Ocazius 2025-09-22 03:23 p.m.

It's Mr. Sandringham who will be questioning you, please wait for him to get online.

SECTION 2025-09-22 03:24 p.m.

No problem I was just saying Hi to everyone

taxi 2025-09-22 03:24 p.m.

taxi

@acarlyle Get a move on

acarlyle 2025-09-22 03:47 p.m.

So now we want everything to be done with haste???

acarlyle 2025-09-22 03:48 p.m.

@SECTION

State your name for the record please.

taxi 2025-09-22 03:49 p.m.

We've always wanted everything done with haste

taxi 2025-09-22 03:49 p.m.

Can u stop with ur annoying sarcastic comments

taxi 2025-09-22 03:50 p.m.

No one is impressed

acarlyle

@SECTION State your name for the record please.

SECTION 2025-09-22 03:58 p.m.

Sectionism

SECTION 2025-09-22 04:54 p.m.

@acarlyle

taxi

Can u stop with ur annoying sarcastic comments

acarlyle 2025-09-22 05:18 p.m.

Stop interrupting

SECTION

Sectionism

acarlyle 2025-09-22 05:18 p.m.

Are you employed within the State of Mayflower?

acarlyle

Are you employed within the State of Mayflower?

SECTION 2025-09-22 05:24 p.m.

Yes.

SECTION

Yes.

acarlyle 2025-09-22 05:25 p.m.

Where are you employed?

acarlyle

Where are you employed?

SECTION 2025-09-22 05:28 p.m.

I am employed with the Mayflower Bureau of Investigation as a Special Agent in the Lander Field Office. I am deployed as a Sheriff’s Deputy with the Clark County Sheriff’s Office, and I am a Major in the Mayflower National Guard.

SECTION

I am employed with the Mayflower Bureau of Investigation as a Special Agent in the Lander Field Office. I am deployed as a Sheriff’s Deputy with the Clark County Sheriff’s Office, ...

acarlyle 2025-09-22 05:30 p.m.

Were you in game August 7th, 2025?

acarlyle

Were you in game August 7th, 2025?

SECTION 2025-09-22 05:33 p.m.

I was patrolling in Clark County on the Mayflower Bureau of Investigation team.

SECTION

I was patrolling in Clark County on the Mayflower Bureau of Investigation team.

acarlyle 2025-09-22 05:41 p.m.

I’m going to show you State’s Exhibit A, please review it, let me know once done.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BHXggPltQTfydEcHseGdYPHsRp65g9BH/view?usp=drivesdk

acarlyle

I’m going to show you State’s Exhibit A, please review it, let me know once done. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BHXggPltQTfydEcHseGdYPHsRp65g9BH/view?usp=drivesdk

SECTION 2025-09-22 05:44 p.m.

I have reviewed the video in full

SECTION

I have reviewed the video in full

acarlyle 2025-09-22 05:44 p.m.

Do you recognise Exhibit A?

SECTION 2025-09-22 05:45 p.m.

I do,

SECTION

I do,

acarlyle 2025-09-22 05:45 p.m.

How do you recognise Exhibit A?

SECTION 2025-09-22 05:45 p.m.

I am the person recording this video

SECTION

I am the person recording this video

acarlyle 2025-09-22 05:45 p.m.

Has Exhibit A been altered in any way?

acarlyle

Has Exhibit A been altered in any way?

SECTION 2025-09-22 05:47 p.m.

No.

SECTION

No.

acarlyle 2025-09-22 05:48 p.m.

Is Exhibit A an accurate depiction of the events that occurred August 7, 2025?

acarlyle

Is Exhibit A an accurate depiction of the events that occurred August 7, 2025?

SECTION 2025-09-22 05:48 p.m.

Yes.

acarlyle 2025-09-22 05:48 p.m.

State moves to admit Exhibit A into evidence @taxi

@Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-09-23 09:20 a.m.

Any objection @taxi

taxi 2025-09-23 10:35 a.m.

None

Ocazius 2025-09-23 11:41 a.m.

So admitted

Ocazius 2025-09-23 11:41 a.m.

@acarlyle

Continue please

acarlyle 2025-09-23 02:05 p.m.

If we look to State's Exhibit A, where are you? @SECTION

acarlyle

If we look to State's Exhibit A, where are you? @SECTION

SECTION 2025-09-23 06:16 p.m.

Lander City. Specifically, in front of the District Court

taxi 2025-09-24 04:03 p.m.

@Ocazius

Surely opposing counsellor doesn't need 24 hour intervals per question

Ocazius 2025-09-24 05:36 p.m.

@acarlyle

Get a move on pls, ty

acarlyle 2025-09-24 06:11 p.m.

Been out all day will continue shortly. But I will remind defense that their frivolous motions are the reason for delays, not me having a life

SECTION

Lander City. Specifically, in front of the District Court

acarlyle 2025-09-24 06:18 p.m.

Can you see the defendant in Exhibit A?

acarlyle

Been out all day will continue shortly. But I will remind defense that their frivolous motions are the reason for delays, not me having a life

taxi 2025-09-24 06:33 p.m.

Ok ro-lawyer

taxi 2025-09-24 06:34 p.m.

Guys go shopping for their mother and call it having a life

acarlyle 2025-09-24 06:34 p.m.

Dont interrupt my direct

acarlyle

Can you see the defendant in Exhibit A?

SECTION 2025-09-24 07:00 p.m.

I can, yes.

SECTION

I can, yes.

acarlyle 2025-09-24 07:02 p.m.

What was the Defendant doing at the time when you encountered him?

acarlyle

What was the Defendant doing at the time when you encountered him?

SECTION 2025-09-24 07:20 p.m.

Initially he was standing next to an LCPD officer and talking.

SECTION 2025-09-24 07:20 p.m.

Then he started smashing my windows while i was inside without cause to do so, and without initial explenation.

SECTION

Then he started smashing my windows while i was inside without cause to do so, and without initial explenation.

acarlyle 2025-09-24 07:21 p.m.

What did you do when you saw the defendant smash your windows?

acarlyle

What did you do when you saw the defendant smash your windows?

SECTION 2025-09-24 07:22 p.m.

I got out of my vehicle to avoid potentially being hit, and to confront the security officer as to why he did that

SECTION

I got out of my vehicle to avoid potentially being hit, and to confront the security officer as to why he did that

acarlyle 2025-09-24 07:23 p.m.

Just to clarify, who was that security officer?

acarlyle

Just to clarify, who was that security officer?

SECTION 2025-09-24 07:24 p.m.

ukraniantrucking

SECTION

ukraniantrucking

acarlyle 2025-09-24 07:25 p.m.

Did the Defendant say anything to you when you confronted him?

acarlyle

Did the Defendant say anything to you when you confronted him?

SECTION 2025-09-24 07:26 p.m.

only thing he said was "authorization mfrom law enforcement"

SECTION

only thing he said was "authorization mfrom law enforcement"

acarlyle 2025-09-24 07:26 p.m.

Interesting.

What happened after you confronted the Defendant?

SECTION 2025-09-24 07:26 p.m.

He ignored me and drove off with my vehicle.

SECTION

He ignored me and drove off with my vehicle.

acarlyle 2025-09-24 07:27 p.m.

How far did he drive with your vehicle?

acarlyle

How far did he drive with your vehicle?

SECTION 2025-09-24 07:27 p.m.

Un-sure, but most definitely to the intersection next to Lander Luxury Dealership,

SECTION 2025-09-24 07:27 p.m.

but most definitely near*, my apologies.

SECTION

but most definitely near*, my apologies.

acarlyle 2025-09-24 07:29 p.m.

Did this hinder you in conducting your duties?

acarlyle

Did this hinder you in conducting your duties?

SECTION 2025-09-24 07:35 p.m.

It did, yes.

SECTION

It did, yes.

acarlyle 2025-09-24 07:41 p.m.

How did this hinder you?

acarlyle

How did this hinder you?

SECTION 2025-09-24 07:42 p.m.

It severely limited my ability to conduct my investigative duties. In fact, during this whole incident the reason I was posted at DC was because I was trying to look for someone who was stealing police vehicles, ad indicated in CW-TAC radio. I was communicating with a fellow MBI agent who had his vehicle stolen.

SECTION 2025-09-24 07:42 p.m.

I had to divert my attention away from potential theft and focus on a security guard beating my windows.

SECTION

It severely limited my ability to conduct my investigative duties. In fact, during this whole incident the reason I was posted at DC was because I was trying to look for someone wh...

acarlyle 2025-09-24 07:54 p.m.

Thank you. Nothing further @Ocazius

acarlyle

Thank you. Nothing further @Ocazius

SECTION 2025-09-24 08:08 p.m.

No problem Counsellor

Ocazius 2025-09-25 02:35 a.m.

@taxi

SECTION

Un-sure, but most definitely to the intersection next to Lander Luxury Dealership,

taxi 2025-09-25 03:00 a.m.

Objection, speculation @Ocazius

taxi

Objection, speculation @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-09-25 07:48 a.m.

Uh I’m not striking that

Ocazius 2025-09-25 07:48 a.m.

Overruled

Ocazius 2025-09-25 07:48 a.m.

Begin or waive cross please

taxi 2025-09-25 10:20 a.m.

I’ll begin shortly

taxi 2025-09-25 11:38 a.m.

@SECTION

What did you do when you lost your behicle?

taxi 2025-09-25 11:38 a.m.

vehicle*

taxi

@SECTION What did you do when you lost your behicle?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 01:26 p.m.

Objection, vague @Ocazius

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 01:27 p.m.

The witness could've lost their vehicle multiple times throughout the day, and at different locations.

taxi 2025-09-25 02:09 p.m.

Well I'm obviously not asking about something that's not related to the case

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 02:48 p.m.

The defendant doesn't know that.

Ocazius 2025-09-25 02:57 p.m.

Overruled, it has just been established and I didn't ask Mr. Sandringham to add a time and date to each question too.

Ocazius 2025-09-25 02:58 p.m.

@taxi

taxi

@SECTION What did you do when you lost your behicle?

taxi 2025-09-25 03:07 p.m.

@SECTION

Please answer.

taxi

@SECTION Please answer.

SECTION 2025-09-25 03:44 p.m.

I don’t recall

SECTION

I don’t recall

taxi 2025-09-25 03:55 p.m.

So your entire testimony is based on the clip from weeks ago rather than what you remember?

taxi

So your entire testimony is based on the clip from weeks ago rather than what you remember?

SECTION 2025-09-25 04:23 p.m.

You asked me “what did I do when I lost my vehicle”, I could’ve done a million things, I don’t recall exactly what.

SECTION 2025-09-25 04:25 p.m.

Are you asking me about in-game specifically or administrative steps?

taxi 2025-09-25 04:30 p.m.

@SECTION

I'm not asking you to provide me with the maths of a rocket

taxi 2025-09-25 04:30 p.m.

What did you do immediately after your vehicle was stolen?

SECTION

You asked me “what did I do when I lost my vehicle”, I could’ve done a million things, I don’t recall exactly what.

taxi 2025-09-25 04:31 p.m.

@Ocazius

I move to strike and his message below

taxi

What did you do immediately after your vehicle was stolen?

SECTION 2025-09-25 04:31 p.m.

I pressed F1 on my keyboard and saved the footage of my vehicle being taken

SECTION

I pressed F1 on my keyboard and saved the footage of my vehicle being taken

taxi 2025-09-25 04:32 p.m.

Then I assume you filled out a tip against the defendant?

taxi

@Ocazius I move to strike and his message below

Ocazius 2025-09-25 04:34 p.m.

Stricken

taxi

Then I assume you filled out a tip against the defendant?

SECTION 2025-09-25 04:44 p.m.

I forwarded the video to the Lander Field Office.

SECTION

I forwarded the video to the Lander Field Office.

taxi 2025-09-25 04:48 p.m.

So you went out of your way to report the defendant while you were on-duty, correct?

SECTION 2025-09-25 04:50 p.m.

I’m not sure what you mean by “went out of your way”. It is my duty to investigate and take action on crimes i witness

SECTION 2025-09-25 04:50 p.m.

@taxi

taxi 2025-09-25 04:51 p.m.

@SECTION

You testified that losing your vehicle severely hindered your ability to conduct investigative duties, correct?

SECTION 2025-09-25 04:51 p.m.

Correct

SECTION 2025-09-25 04:52 p.m.

Well duties in general

SECTION 2025-09-25 04:52 p.m.

Not purely investigative

taxi 2025-09-25 04:52 p.m.

So why did you say investigative duties earleir?

taxi 2025-09-25 04:52 p.m.

earlier*

SECTION 2025-09-25 04:52 p.m.

Because that is what I was conducting at the time

SECTION 2025-09-25 04:52 p.m.

Specifically

taxi 2025-09-25 04:53 p.m.

Why did losing your vehicle prevent hinder your duties?

taxi 2025-09-25 04:53 p.m.

@SECTION

taxi 2025-09-25 04:53 p.m.

Why did losing your vehicle hinder your duties?
**

SECTION 2025-09-25 04:54 p.m.

Apologies counsellor, are you asking specifically towards the investigation I testified I was conducting? Or in general @taxi

taxi 2025-09-25 04:55 p.m.

In general

taxi

In general

SECTION 2025-09-25 05:00 p.m.

Thanks for clarifying. My duties are all about timing. If I cannot respond in time, lives are potentially lost. My vehicle gets me from Point A to B far quicker than if I were on foot.

My vehicle also allows me to stay somewhat concealed when conducting an investigation, keeping me safer.

taxi 2025-09-25 05:02 p.m.

How noble

taxi 2025-09-25 05:03 p.m.

@SECTION

Why did losing your vehicle prevent you from conducting your investigative duties?

taxi

@SECTION Why did losing your vehicle prevent you from conducting your investigative duties?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 05:04 p.m.

@Ocazius

Objection, asked and answered

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 05:04 p.m.

https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1413244199289225296/1420875828123799603

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 05:04 p.m.

Literally

taxi 2025-09-25 05:05 p.m.

No...

taxi 2025-09-25 05:05 p.m.

He answered as to why it prevented his general duties

taxi 2025-09-25 05:05 p.m.

Now I'm asking about his investigation so

taxi 2025-09-25 05:06 p.m.

I'll rephrase if it'll keep you from soiling your trousers

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 05:06 p.m.

Your honour, he is literally asking the same question.

taxi 2025-09-25 05:06 p.m.

Withdrawn

taxi 2025-09-25 05:06 p.m.

@SECTION

How did losing your vehicle hinder your investigation?

taxi

@SECTION How did losing your vehicle hinder your investigation?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 05:07 p.m.

Objection, assume facts not evidence

taxi 2025-09-25 05:08 p.m.

"How did this hinder you?"

Witness: "It severely limited my ability to conduct investigative duties"

taxi 2025-09-25 05:08 p.m.

@AlbertBlackwell

Withdraw mate

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 05:09 p.m.

A vital part of law enforcement activity is investigations, you are asking about a specific investigation of which hasn't been established

SECTION

It severely limited my ability to conduct my investigative duties. In fact, during this whole incident the reason I was posted at DC was because I was trying to look for someone wh...

taxi 2025-09-25 05:09 p.m.

Read this...

taxi 2025-09-25 05:09 p.m.

He was conducting an investigation

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 05:10 p.m.

Withdrawn

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 05:10 p.m.

@taxi

taxi 2025-09-25 05:10 p.m.

Cheers mush

taxi 2025-09-25 05:10 p.m.

@SECTION

Please answer

taxi

@SECTION How did losing your vehicle hinder your investigation?

taxi 2025-09-25 05:10 p.m.

SECTION 2025-09-25 05:10 p.m.

Sure

SECTION 2025-09-25 05:13 p.m.

It hindered me because as I was conducting my investigation my windows were bashed out whilst I was sitting in my vehicle, with glass going all over my face. And then my vehicle was stolen therefore diverting my attention away from trying to find the original suspect in question stealing cars from law enforcement.

SECTION 2025-09-25 05:13 p.m.

@taxi

taxi 2025-09-25 05:14 p.m.

@SECTION

Why didn't you decide to go and respawn your car if not having one hindered your duties so much?

taxi

@SECTION Why didn't you decide to go and respawn your car if not having one hindered your duties so much?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 05:15 p.m.

Objection relevance

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 05:16 p.m.

Your honour, we cannot see where this line of questioning is going at all - is the counsel attempting to blame the witness for not respawning his car as to explain the alleged actions of the defendant

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 05:16 p.m.

@Ocazius

taxi 2025-09-25 05:17 p.m.

It’s relevant

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 05:17 p.m.

I want to wait for a ruling

taxi

How noble

acarlyle 2025-09-25 05:22 p.m.

Move to strike this comment @Ocazius

AlbertBlackwell

Objection relevance

acarlyle 2025-09-25 05:23 p.m.

Objection withdrawn @taxi

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-25 05:23 p.m.

Withdrawn

taxi 2025-09-25 05:23 p.m.

Love

taxi

@SECTION Why didn't you decide to go and respawn your car if not having one hindered your duties so much?

taxi 2025-09-25 05:24 p.m.

@SECTION

answer

taxi

@SECTION answer

SECTION 2025-09-25 05:35 p.m.

After my windows had been broken, my attention was diverted to the defendant. I was also notified that my fellow Agents car had been respawned so nobody immediately needed support. Obviously the suspect was still at large but in terms of being able to get probable cause it was slim.

So, since a crime had been committed, I decided to investigate what had just occurred in front of me before respawning my vehicle.

acarlyle

Move to strike this comment @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-09-26 02:37 a.m.

Stricken

Ocazius 2025-09-26 02:37 a.m.

No need for silly remarks

Ocazius 2025-09-26 02:37 a.m.

@taxi

SECTION

After my windows had been broken, my attention was diverted to the defendant. I was also notified that my fellow Agents car had been respawned so nobody immediately needed support....

taxi 2025-09-26 11:10 a.m.

So despite a vehicle being necessary to your duties, instead of going to get one you decided to report the defendant instead?

taxi

So despite a vehicle being necessary to your duties, instead of going to get one you decided to report the defendant instead?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-09-26 12:55 p.m.

Objection argumentative @Ocazius

AlbertBlackwell

Objection argumentative @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-09-26 01:20 p.m.

Sustained

Ocazius 2025-09-26 01:20 p.m.

@taxi

Ocazius 2025-09-26 01:21 p.m.

This is not a movie

Ocazius 2025-09-26 01:21 p.m.

There are no kudos points for dramatic and emotional point establishments

taxi 2025-09-26 02:05 p.m.

@Ocazius

I yield

Ocazius 2025-09-26 02:21 p.m.

Alright

Ocazius 2025-09-26 02:21 p.m.

@AlbertBlackwell

@acarlyle

Ocazius 2025-09-26 02:21 p.m.

Ocazius

@AlbertBlackwell

@acarlyle

acarlyle 2025-09-26 03:10 p.m.

We call @mattheias12777

Ocazius used

/add

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-26 03:11 p.m.

Case Modified

@Ocazius

has added @mattheias12777 to the case channel.

Ocazius used

/administeroath

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-26 03:11 p.m.

@mattheias12777

(edited)

Oath Selection

Which type of oath would you like to swear to?

Religious

- Involves swearing to god that your testimony is, or will be, truthful.

Non-Religious

- Solemnly affirms that your testimony is, or will be, truthful, under the pains and penalties of perjury.

Religious Oath

Non-Religious Oath

BotclerkFlow

@mattheias12777

clerkFlow Bot2025-09-26 03:11 p.m.

@mattheias12777

Religious Oath

Do you solemnly swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, so help you god?

mattheias12777 2025-09-26 03:11 p.m.

yes

mattheias12777 2025-09-26 03:13 p.m.

@Ocazius

Good evening your Honor

mattheias12777 2025-09-26 03:14 p.m.

@acarlyle

Hello sir

mattheias12777 2025-09-26 03:14 p.m.

Ocazius 2025-09-26 03:18 p.m.

@acarlyle

acarlyle 2025-09-26 04:22 p.m.

@mattheias12777

State your name for the tecor

acarlyle 2025-09-26 04:22 p.m.

record*

mattheias12777 2025-09-26 04:22 p.m.

Mattheias12777

mattheias12777 2025-09-26 04:25 p.m.

@acarlyle

mattheias12777

Mattheias12777

acarlyle 2025-09-26 04:26 p.m.

Are you employed within the State of Mayflower?

acarlyle

Are you employed within the State of Mayflower?

mattheias12777 2025-09-26 04:26 p.m.

Yes

mattheias12777

Yes

acarlyle 2025-09-26 04:26 p.m.

Where are you employed?

acarlyle

Where are you employed?

mattheias12777 2025-09-26 04:27 p.m.

I am a Special Agent within the Mayflower Bureau of Investigation and I am a current Master Deputy within the Clark County Sheriff's Office.

mattheias12777

I am a Special Agent within the Mayflower Bureau of Investigation and I am a current Master Deputy within the Clark County Sheriff's Office.

acarlyle 2025-09-26 04:28 p.m.

How long have you been an agent in the Mayflower Bureau of Investigation?

acarlyle

How long have you been an agent in the Mayflower Bureau of Investigation?

mattheias12777 2025-09-26 04:29 p.m.

I have been employed within the Mayflower Bureau of Investigations since the 13th of August, 2025.

mattheias12777 2025-09-26 04:29 p.m.

Investigation*

mattheias12777

I have been employed within the Mayflower Bureau of Investigations since the 13th of August, 2025.

acarlyle 2025-09-26 04:29 p.m.

Have you received training in Law Enforcement, which includes conducting investigations?

acarlyle

Have you received training in Law Enforcement, which includes conducting investigations?

mattheias12777 2025-09-26 04:32 p.m.

Yes, I have a current LETI certificate which backs up my law enforcement knowledge and I have undergone and graduated a long, detailed academy within my MBINEOP (Mayflower Bureau of Investigation New Employee Onboarding Program) that includes investigative training.(edited)

mattheias12777

Yes, I have a current LETI certificate which backs up my law enforcement knowledge and I have undergone and graduated a long, detailed academy within my MBINEOP (Mayflower Bureau o...(edited)

acarlyle 2025-09-26 04:33 p.m.

Were you the appointed Agent to investigate this case?

acarlyle

Have you received training in Law Enforcement, which includes conducting investigations?

taxi 2025-09-26 04:33 p.m.

@Ocazius

leading

acarlyle

Were you the appointed Agent to investigate this case?

mattheias12777 2025-09-26 04:34 p.m.

No, I was not the primary investigator of the case.

mattheias12777 2025-09-26 04:34 p.m.

But, I was appointed to the case to investigate, yes

taxi

@Ocazius leading

Ocazius 2025-09-26 05:21 p.m.

Sustained, answer stricken

Ocazius 2025-09-26 05:21 p.m.

Rephrse or ask another @acarlyle

taxi 2025-09-27 12:40 p.m.

@acarlyle

While we're breathing

taxi

@acarlyle While we're breathing

Ocazius 2025-09-27 01:34 p.m.

You are hereby fined $300 and ordered to pay it to a random person in the next 48 hours, or I will order you to show cause. It is not your job to hold counsel to account and a reasonable timeframe, it is mine. This is now becoming a repeated habit of yours to drop these snarky comments. Whilst it may not amount to much now, I have experience with cases where this is responded to, an argument breaks out and then both counsels end up with contempt.

Ocazius

You are hereby fined $300 and ordered to pay it to a random person in the next 48 hours, or I will order you to show cause. It is not your job to hold counsel to account and a reas...

taxi 2025-09-27 01:56 p.m.

my client has the right to a speedy trial and on numerous occasions, opposing counsel have taken lengthy time periods to ask questions

Ocazius 2025-09-27 02:14 p.m.

And you believe that 'While we're breathing' is a professional, adequate and efficient response, from yourself, as opposed to an order from myself encouraging counsel to get a move on?

taxi

@acarlyle While we're breathing

acarlyle 2025-09-27 03:13 p.m.

I have a life. I dont spend all day on roblox.

mattheias12777

Yes, I have a current LETI certificate which backs up my law enforcement knowledge and I have undergone and graduated a long, detailed academy within my MBINEOP (Mayflower Bureau o...(edited)

acarlyle 2025-09-27 03:14 p.m.

Did you receive Training when you joined the MBI?

acarlyle

Did you receive Training when you joined the MBI?

mattheias12777 2025-09-27 03:14 p.m.

Yes

mattheias12777

Yes

acarlyle 2025-09-27 03:14 p.m.

What did that training consist of?

mattheias12777 2025-09-27 03:15 p.m.

Investigative training

mattheias12777 2025-09-27 03:15 p.m.

@acarlyle

acarlyle 2025-09-27 03:22 p.m.

Thank you. We move to admit this witness as an expert in Law Enforcement & Investigations @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-09-27 03:40 p.m.

@taxi

Ocazius 2025-09-27 03:41 p.m.

Objection?

mattheias12777 2025-09-27 03:53 p.m.

-adjusts my liverpool FC tie

acarlyle

I have a life. I dont spend all day on roblox.

taxi 2025-09-27 03:59 p.m.

Cap

taxi 2025-09-27 03:59 p.m.

WE spend our life on roblox

Ocazius

Objection?

taxi 2025-09-27 03:59 p.m.

None

mattheias12777 2025-09-27 04:53 p.m.

-drinks coffee from my liverpool FC mug

mattheias12777 2025-09-28 10:13 a.m.

-wakes up

mattheias12777 2025-09-28 10:13 a.m.

-greets @acarlyle

mattheias12777 2025-09-28 10:50 a.m.

-sleeps

Ocazius 2025-09-28 12:11 p.m.

Oops

acarlyle

Thank you. We move to admit this witness as an expert in Law Enforcement & Investigations @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-09-28 12:11 p.m.

Admitted

Ocazius 2025-09-28 12:11 p.m.

Continue please

mattheias12777 2025-09-28 01:28 p.m.

-scribbles on my paper

mattheias12777 2025-09-28 01:32 p.m.

-glances at @acarlyle

Ocazius 2025-09-28 01:38 p.m.

Stop

mattheias12777 2025-09-28 02:26 p.m.

acarlyle 2025-09-28 06:27 p.m.

@mattheias12777

I would like to direct your attention to State's Exhibits A & B, please review and let me know when done.

A - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BHXggPltQTfydEcHseGdYPHsRp65g9BH/view?usp=drivesdk
B - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AJYyqIXNmcTnXTIuVf6SEQusCQ4L2deb/view

64bd1IrAPSelFInDFy0uUw.mp4

lSDugjFcfvJIp8baXLb9XhR.mp4

acarlyle

@mattheias12777 I would like to direct your attention to State's Exhibits A & B, please review and let me know when done. A - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BHXggPltQTfydE...

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 06:27 a.m.

Done

acarlyle 2025-09-29 09:04 a.m.

Thank you. Let's focus on Exhibit A.

acarlyle

Thank you. Let's focus on Exhibit A.

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:07 a.m.

Ok.

mattheias12777

Ok.

acarlyle 2025-09-29 09:08 a.m.

What is happening in Exhibit A?

acarlyle

What is happening in Exhibit A?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:14 a.m.

I am assuming that Sectionism, whilst representing the Department of Justice, representing the Mayflower Bureau of Investigation, had his department issued Cala Jackalope parked at or near the Lander Courthouse. Then, 101waves told Sectionism to move, which sectionism was going to respond to. Not long after, ukrainiantrucking smashes the windows of Sectionism's vehicle. 4~ seconds after, a text trailer got placed behind his Jackalope. Ukrainiantrucking, not authorized to operate or enter Sectionism's Unmarked law enforcement issued Jackalope, still entered his vehicle and drives off in a reckless manner, smashing into the front bumper of yet another law enforcement vehicle thanks to his reckless driving.(edited)

mattheias12777

I am assuming that Sectionism, whilst representing the Department of Justice, representing the Mayflower Bureau of Investigation, had his department issued Cala Jackalope parked at...(edited)

acarlyle 2025-09-29 09:17 a.m.

Was Agent Sectionism legally allowed to park where he was?

acarlyle

Was Agent Sectionism legally allowed to park where he was?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:18 a.m.

Normally yes. He does not meet these requirements:

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:19 a.m.

However assuming that there was an event going on at the courthouse in lander, 101waves asked sectionism to move his vehicle for a reason that I cannot figure out.

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:19 a.m.

Looking at his text he was writing, he was about to move

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:19 a.m.

But was hindered by ukrainiantrucking

acarlyle 2025-09-29 09:19 a.m.

Let's be hypothetical here. Let's assume that Agent Sectionism was unlawfully parked. Would the Defendant lawfully be able to order him to move his vehicle?

acarlyle

Let's be hypothetical here. Let's assume that Agent Sectionism was unlawfully parked. Would the Defendant lawfully be able to order him to move his vehicle?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:22 a.m.

Ukrainiantrucking, a security officer for the North Coast Police Department was in no right to order a Law Enforcement agent on what to do regarding parking. Unless a clear sign was placed somewhere, or another Law Enforcement Officer (101waves), allowed in the city of Lander (LCPD, CCSO, ..) asked him to, then he could have to move. Of course, it would be possible that he was parked there exactly to conduct surveillance or something, but I have no knowledge of any of those assumptions.

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:23 a.m.

I can take some time to further study this exact topic, if a law enforcement officer within the Lander City Police Department is allowed to boss another LEO around regarding parking somewhere.

acarlyle 2025-09-29 09:23 a.m.

Knowing that the Defendant is only a Security Guard, would he be lawfully allowed to smash the windows of a LEO Vehicle, and move it?

acarlyle

Knowing that the Defendant is only a Security Guard, would he be lawfully allowed to smash the windows of a LEO Vehicle, and move it?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:24 a.m.

Depends on the situation. In the case of Exhibit A, no.

acarlyle 2025-09-29 09:25 a.m.

Do Law Enforcement Vehicles have specific permissions that allow only specific people to enter those vehicles?]

acarlyle

Do Law Enforcement Vehicles have specific permissions that allow only specific people to enter those vehicles?]

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:26 a.m.

Yes. To my current knowledge, anyone that is of a certain rank within their department's group, can access most, if not all spawned unmarked vehicles.

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:26 a.m.

In the case of Exhibit A, 101waves could have moved Sectionism's vehicle without smashing the windows.

acarlyle 2025-09-29 09:27 a.m.

As a Law Enforcement Officer, or a Security Guard, what happens if you smash the windows of a vehicle?

acarlyle

As a Law Enforcement Officer, or a Security Guard, what happens if you smash the windows of a vehicle?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:27 a.m.

What do you mean by this question?

acarlyle 2025-09-29 09:27 a.m.

When you smash the windows of the driver side, what prompts come up?

acarlyle

As a Law Enforcement Officer, or a Security Guard, what happens if you smash the windows of a vehicle?

acarlyle 2025-09-29 09:27 a.m.

This is withdrawn

acarlyle

When you smash the windows of the driver side, what prompts come up?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:28 a.m.

You would go in 'combat mode' in the game, car alarms can go off, you could have consequences on your criminal record

mattheias12777

You would go in 'combat mode' in the game, car alarms can go off, you could have consequences on your criminal record

acarlyle 2025-09-29 09:30 a.m.

As a Law Enforcement Officer or Security Guard, what prompts come up when you smash the driver's side window on a vehicle?

acarlyle 2025-09-29 09:31 a.m.

Do you understand what I'm asking? @mattheias12777

acarlyle 2025-09-29 09:31 a.m.

if not I'll rephrase.

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:31 a.m.

Rephrase please

acarlyle 2025-09-29 09:32 a.m.

When a Law Enforcement Officer or Security Guard smashes the driver's side window of a vehicle, Does this provide access to the vehicle?

acarlyle

When a Law Enforcement Officer or Security Guard smashes the driver's side window of a vehicle, Does this provide access to the vehicle?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:34 a.m.

Depends, if it is not your vehicle, then you will have to smash all windows of the vehicle to enter any seat in the vehicle.

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:34 a.m.

If it is your vehicle, you can do the same, or just unlock the vehicle and then enter any seat in the vehicle

mattheias12777

Depends, if it is not your vehicle, then you will have to smash all windows of the vehicle to enter any seat in the vehicle.

acarlyle 2025-09-29 09:34 a.m.

Can we see this in Exhibit A?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:35 a.m.

Yes, Ukrainiantrucking intentionally breaks all windows of the Unmarked cala jackalope to gain access to the driver's seat.

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 09:36 a.m.

cc: @acarlyle (did NOT REPLY TO YOUR MESSAGE . . .)

mattheias12777

Yes, Ukrainiantrucking intentionally breaks all windows of the Unmarked cala jackalope to gain access to the driver's seat.

acarlyle 2025-09-29 01:59 p.m.

Do you think it is possible that this was an accidental action?

acarlyle

Do you think it is possible that this was an accidental action?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 02:11 p.m.

No, unless he somehow managed to move around the cala jackalope whilst facing the windows of the vehicle, whilst repeatedly slamming the car chassis (and windows) with his department issued baton accidentally(edited)

mattheias12777

No, unless he somehow managed to move around the cala jackalope whilst facing the windows of the vehicle, whilst repeatedly slamming the car chassis (and windows) with his departme...(edited)

acarlyle 2025-09-29 03:24 p.m.

Do you think that the Defendant getting in Agent Sectionism’s vehicle and driving it away was accidental?

acarlyle

Do you think that the Defendant getting in Agent Sectionism’s vehicle and driving it away was accidental?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:24 p.m.

mattheias12777

acarlyle 2025-09-29 03:25 p.m.

How would you describe the manner of driving after Agent Sectionism’s vehicle was taken?

acarlyle

How would you describe the manner of driving after Agent Sectionism’s vehicle was taken?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:26 p.m.

Ukrainiantrucking has utilized little to no care whilst driving sectionism's vehicle and the consequences were very shocking, as he crashed into a police vehicle, and sped off in a fast manner

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:26 p.m.

Not even using directors or signals for turning

mattheias12777

Ukrainiantrucking has utilized little to no care whilst driving sectionism's vehicle and the consequences were very shocking, as he crashed into a police vehicle, and sped off in a...

acarlyle 2025-09-29 03:28 p.m.

Thank you. Lets now focus on Exhibit B.

What is happening in Exhibit B?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:31 p.m.

We can see divinemissile, deputy of the CCSO, parked temporarily (you can hear the engine roaring, being in idle) and 6 seconds into the exhibit we can seei Ukrainiantrucking asking 'is this your car' referring to the patrol vehicle of DivineMissile, to then just smash his windows in without any further explanation, get in the vehicle, speed off to somewhere and even tragically and possibly fatally striking the deputy, with his own patrol vehicle must I add

mattheias12777

We can see divinemissile, deputy of the CCSO, parked temporarily (you can hear the engine roaring, being in idle) and 6 seconds into the exhibit we can seei Ukrainiantrucking askin...

acarlyle 2025-09-29 03:33 p.m.

To your knowledge, did the Defendant act at the direction of anyone?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:34 p.m.

During my formal investigation I have not found anything that directs towards someone ordering the defendant to enforce parking regulations

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:35 p.m.

Though, there are traffic signs, saying 'no parking' but assuming that our victim divinemissile was 'parked' temporarily on the side of the road, checking up on the lander courthouse

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:36 p.m.

DivineMissile might have misunderstood where you can park and where not. There are traffic cones on one side of the wide road, but no traffic cones on the side that he was parked on.

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:36 p.m.

acarlyle 2025-09-29 03:45 p.m.

Is the Defendant a parking enforcement officer?

acarlyle

Is the Defendant a parking enforcement officer?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:50 p.m.

mattheias12777

acarlyle 2025-09-29 03:50 p.m.

Is the Defendant responsible for enforcing parking law?

acarlyle

Is the Defendant responsible for enforcing parking law?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:53 p.m.

No, nor does ncpd

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:54 p.m.

In an ever evolving world of threat actors, North Coast is the solution. Providing peace of mind with threat assessments, protective services, surveillance, crisis management, and advice, our highly qualified professionals and our integration of cutting-edge technology make us the most dependable and trustworthy option for those needing security.

"𝐁𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐄𝐧𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐬 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧."

This comes straight from their discord

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:54 p.m.

Nothing about parking enforcement

mattheias12777

No, nor does ncpd

acarlyle 2025-09-29 03:54 p.m.

In your opinion, would the defendant have been away that he had no lawful jurisdiction over the enforcement of parking?

acarlyle

In your opinion, would the defendant have been away that he had no lawful jurisdiction over the enforcement of parking?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:55 p.m.

He had no lawful jurisdiction for any enforcement there, the lcpd has their respective division for traffic regulating

mattheias12777

He had no lawful jurisdiction for any enforcement there, the lcpd has their respective division for traffic regulating

acarlyle 2025-09-29 03:56 p.m.

Would the Defendant have been aware that he had no jurisdiction for enforcing parking?

acarlyle

Would the Defendant have been aware that he had no jurisdiction for enforcing parking?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:57 p.m.

I would not be able to answer that, as the training he received may say otherwise

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:57 p.m.

Maybe he got intensive training for parking enforcement

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 03:59 p.m.

On properties that ncpd has contracts on

mattheias12777

On properties that ncpd has contracts on

acarlyle 2025-09-29 04:01 p.m.

Are Law Enforcement exempt from Title 2 offenses?

acarlyle

Are Law Enforcement exempt from Title 2 offenses?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 04:02 p.m.

mattheias12777

acarlyle 2025-09-29 04:03 p.m.

I'll direct you to 4 M.S.C. 5 Section 2302. I'll allow you to clarify your answer.

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 04:04 p.m.

I am currently on my mobile telecommunications device, allow me a brief minute to download the mayflower state code onto the google spreadsheets app .

acarlyle

Are Law Enforcement exempt from Title 2 offenses?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 04:06 p.m.

I will rephrase my answer as I have misread your question

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 04:07 p.m.

Yes, given they maintain care in their lawful performance of their duties

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 04:08 p.m.

I will add that this only applies to the authorized drivers of the law enforcement vehicle

mattheias12777

I will add that this only applies to the authorized drivers of the law enforcement vehicle

acarlyle 2025-09-29 04:08 p.m.

Is Deputy DivineMissile an authorized driver of a Law Enforcement Vehicle?

acarlyle

Is Deputy DivineMissile an authorized driver of a Law Enforcement Vehicle?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 04:09 p.m.

He is an authorized driver of a law enforcement vehicle yes, any departmental (ccso) issued vehicle

mattheias12777

He is an authorized driver of a law enforcement vehicle yes, any departmental (ccso) issued vehicle

acarlyle 2025-09-29 04:12 p.m.

Does Deputy DivineMissile's vehicle have specific permissions that allow only specific people to enter?

acarlyle

Does Deputy DivineMissile's vehicle have specific permissions that allow only specific people to enter?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 04:13 p.m.

Yes, deputized ccso members are allowed to unlock his patrol vehicle and enter it

mattheias12777

Yes, deputized ccso members are allowed to unlock his patrol vehicle and enter it

acarlyle 2025-09-29 04:13 p.m.

What happened to those restrictions when the Defendant smashed the windows?

acarlyle

What happened to those restrictions when the Defendant smashed the windows?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 04:16 p.m.

When the defendant smashed all windows of the ccso marked evora, anyone that would otherwise be granted a departmental vehicle could enter the evora without restrictions

acarlyle 2025-09-29 04:16 p.m.

What did the Defendant do after this?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 04:16 p.m.

Most of the people, I do not know if same applies for the fire department, or other small departments

acarlyle

What did the Defendant do after this?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 04:18 p.m.

He entered the ccso cala evora, said nothing else after 'is this your car', started speeding off in a reckless manner, managing to hit the deputy (divinemissile) whilst operating the ccso evora in a reckless manner

mattheias12777

He entered the ccso cala evora, said nothing else after 'is this your car', started speeding off in a reckless manner, managing to hit the deputy (divinemissile) whilst operating t...

acarlyle 2025-09-29 04:18 p.m.

Do you believe the Defendant had intent when he took these actions?

mattheias12777

He entered the ccso cala evora, said nothing else after 'is this your car', started speeding off in a reckless manner, managing to hit the deputy (divinemissile) whilst operating t...

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 04:18 p.m.

Key parts of what happened after the window smashing

acarlyle

Do you believe the Defendant had intent when he took these actions?

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 04:18 p.m.

Yes, as the chance is slim this is accidental

acarlyle 2025-09-29 04:19 p.m.

Thank you. Nothing further @Ocazius

mattheias12777 2025-09-29 04:19 p.m.

Ocazius 2025-09-29 04:36 p.m.

@taxi

Ocazius 2025-09-29 04:36 p.m.

all yours

acarlyle

Would the Defendant have been aware that he had no jurisdiction for enforcing parking?

taxi 2025-09-29 04:38 p.m.

@Ocazius

objection and move to strike answers

acarlyle

To your knowledge, did the Defendant act at the direction of anyone?

taxi 2025-09-29 04:39 p.m.

objection and move to strike answers

taxi 2025-09-29 04:39 p.m.

witness cannot possibly know the answer to any of these

acarlyle

When a Law Enforcement Officer or Security Guard smashes the driver's side window of a vehicle, Does this provide access to the vehicle?

taxi 2025-09-29 04:40 p.m.

objection and move to strike answers for leading

taxi

@Ocazius objection and move to strike answers

Ocazius 2025-09-29 05:08 p.m.

Sustained

Ocazius 2025-09-29 05:09 p.m.

Will review others when wake up, begin cross in meantime

taxi 2025-09-29 05:26 p.m.

About to sleep myself anyways, will continue sometime tomorrow

taxi

objection and move to strike answers for leading

Ocazius 2025-09-30 01:33 p.m.

Sustained

taxi

objection and move to strike answers

Ocazius 2025-09-30 01:34 p.m.

Sustained

Ocazius 2025-09-30 01:34 p.m.

Begin Questioning

taxi 2025-09-30 03:57 p.m.

@mattheias12777

You testified that if there was a clear sign present or a police officer asked the defendant to move the car, he'd have to, correct?

acarlyle 2025-10-01 08:14 a.m.

@mattheias12777

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 08:14 a.m.

@mattheias12777

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 08:14 a.m.

I will respond to this in a minute

taxi

@mattheias12777 You testified that if there was a clear sign present or a police officer asked the defendant to move the car, he'd have to, correct?

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 08:15 a.m.

Maybe, though the Defendant does not have permissions, even if given by anyone or a 'sign', to move a law enforcement vehicle car.

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 08:16 a.m.

If there was LCPD (which there was), they would have to move them.

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 08:17 a.m.

And if in some way or another, they do get permissions to move the Law enforcement vehicle, they'd have to do it legally, and tell the individual to move their car. Only then, after a clear verbal warning is given, they may move it. It is obstructing to the legal duties of DivineMissile / Sectionism to just move their car to an unknown location

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 08:19 a.m.

The defendant has to follow state laws, according to the Internal Policies Handbook of the NCPD when handling security matters for a client, as I believe that they were contracted to protect the lander courthouse

taxi 2025-10-01 10:18 a.m.

@Ocazius

why’s he giving me the story of his life

taxi 2025-10-01 10:18 a.m.

I asked him a yes or no question

taxi 2025-10-01 10:18 a.m.

I move to strike

Ocazius 2025-10-01 10:58 a.m.

Stricken

taxi 2025-10-01 11:19 a.m.

@mattheias12777

Yes or no.

You testified that if there was a clear sign present or a police officer asked the defendant to move the care, he’d have to, correct?

taxi

@mattheias12777 Yes or no. You testified that if there was a clear sign present or a police officer asked the defendant to move the care, he’d have to, correct?

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 11:19 a.m.

Care?

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 11:20 a.m.

You mean car?

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 11:20 a.m.

if yes, no

taxi 2025-10-01 11:20 a.m.

car*

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 11:22 a.m.

Ok i retract my answer

taxi 2025-10-01 11:22 a.m.

Nope

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 11:22 a.m.

is that a thing in court

taxi 2025-10-01 11:23 a.m.

You said earlier and I quote

“Unless a clear sign was placed somewhere, or another Law Enforcement Officer (101waves), allowed in the city of Lander (LCPD, CCSO, ..) asked him to, then he could have to move”

taxi 2025-10-01 11:23 a.m.

And now you said no

taxi 2025-10-01 11:23 a.m.

You just lied, no?

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 11:24 a.m.

Your question is confusing in my opinion

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 11:24 a.m.

By defendant, you mean ukrainiantrucking right

taxi 2025-10-01 11:24 a.m.

There are no other defendants, mr expert.

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 11:24 a.m.

thank you mr public defender

taxi

You said earlier and I quote “Unless a clear sign was placed somewhere, or another Law Enforcement Officer (101waves), allowed in the city of Lander (LCPD, CCSO, ..) asked him to...

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 11:25 a.m.

asked him to, referring to the victim

taxi 2025-10-01 11:26 a.m.

Interesting.

mattheias12777

asked him to, referring to the victim

taxi 2025-10-01 11:30 a.m.

So let me get this straight, despite your answer clearly stating “another law enticement Officer […] asked him to”

You meant the victim?

taxi

So let me get this straight, despite your answer clearly stating “another law enticement Officer […] asked him to” You meant the victim?

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 11:32 a.m.

My answer is not what you have stated

taxi 2025-10-01 11:33 a.m.

This is what happens when you try and act smart mr expert and give long answers when asked yes or no questions!

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 11:33 a.m.

By my statement I mean that you have not copy pasted correctly with what I have said

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 11:33 a.m.

What is a law enticement officer

mattheias12777 2025-10-01 11:34 a.m.

I have not mentioned that in my statement earlier

taxi 2025-10-01 11:34 a.m.

@Ocazius

I move to strike the witness from the record and his entire testimony

taxi 2025-10-01 11:34 a.m.

He’s taking the piss

taxi 2025-10-01 11:34 a.m.

And quite frankly, I don’t have time

taxi 2025-10-01 11:35 a.m.

He can’t just avoid questions because of typos

taxi

@mattheias12777 Yes or no. You testified that if there was a clear sign present or a police officer asked the defendant to move the care, he’d have to, correct?

acarlyle 2025-10-01 11:38 a.m.

Misquoting testimony. He was not referencing the defendant at the time. Move to strike the answer & subsequent statements @Ocazius

taxi

So let me get this straight, despite your answer clearly stating “another law enticement Officer […] asked him to” You meant the victim?

acarlyle 2025-10-01 11:39 a.m.

Objection. Misquoting Testimony. Law Enticement Officer? Seems dodgy

acarlyle 2025-10-01 11:40 a.m.

And to strike the entire testimony of this witness because he wants clarification is just as absurd as Defense Counsels attitude.

acarlyle 2025-10-01 04:08 p.m.

@Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-10-01 04:26 p.m.

Both sustained

Ocazius 2025-10-01 04:26 p.m.

(Your objections)

Ocazius 2025-10-01 04:26 p.m.

I’m not striking all testimony, only ones to those questions

Ocazius 2025-10-01 04:26 p.m.

@taxi

acarlyle

Misquoting testimony. He was not referencing the defendant at the time. Move to strike the answer & subsequent statements @Ocazius

taxi 2025-10-01 04:37 p.m.

how is this sustained

taxi 2025-10-01 04:37 p.m.

@Ocazius

the witness literally testified to that

taxi 2025-10-01 04:38 p.m.

acarlyle 2025-10-01 05:52 p.m.

Right, which is referencing the victim?

taxi

Click to see attachment.

Ocazius 2025-10-02 02:16 a.m.

Unclear

Ocazius

Unclear

taxi 2025-10-02 03:13 p.m.

wdym

taxi 2025-10-02 03:13 p.m.

whats unclear

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-03 04:54 p.m.

@taxi

Can you continue your questioning

taxi 2025-10-03 04:59 p.m.

Don't rush me lad

taxi 2025-10-03 04:59 p.m.

This is a very busy 2 weeks for me

taxi 2025-10-03 05:01 p.m.

@mattheias12777

If a law enforcement asked the defendant to move any vehicles which appear illegally parked, he would have to since the defendant is a security officer, right?

mattheias12777 2025-10-03 05:04 p.m.

taxi 2025-10-03 05:08 p.m.

@mattheias12777

You testified that you believe the defendant had intent when he took the actions, right?

taxi 2025-10-03 05:10 p.m.

Just say yes or no

mattheias12777 2025-10-03 05:10 p.m.

If we are talking about him vandalizing a law enforcement vehicle, entering it, speeding off, driving over a deputy, and other stuff that I may have skipped over in this message

, yes

mattheias12777 2025-10-03 05:10 p.m.

There you go

mattheias12777 2025-10-03 05:10 p.m.

See what i did there

taxi 2025-10-03 05:11 p.m.

@Ocazius

What is he doing

mattheias12777 2025-10-03 05:11 p.m.

If you cannot click the message due to a malfunction, i will recite: If we are talking about him vandalizing a law enforcement vehicle, entering it, speeding off, driving over a deputy, and other stuff that I may have skipped over in this message, yes(edited)

taxi 2025-10-03 05:12 p.m.

@mattheias12777

I move for sanctions against the witness.

- Weird messages, not answering the question and editing messages

taxi 2025-10-03 05:12 p.m.

He has just corrupted the line if testimony

taxi 2025-10-03 05:12 p.m.

of*

taxi

@mattheias12777 I move for sanctions against the witness. - Weird messages, not answering the question and editing messages

mattheias12777 2025-10-03 05:25 p.m.

@Ocazius

taxi 2025-10-03 05:31 p.m.

oops

taxi 2025-10-03 05:31 p.m.

@Ocazius

taxi 2025-10-03 05:31 p.m.

meant to ping judge

Ocazius 2025-10-03 05:36 p.m.

I've reviewed the message which was edited, and nothing was removed except for the spoiler. That being said, I have no clue what the fuck the point in that actually was, and if I was asked to find one word to describe the witness at this point in testimony, it would be zesty. I'll admit that your spontaneity has made me chuckle, but please:
1. Answer questions properly.
2. Do not edit messages.
3. Do not do whatever the hell you just did.

Continue please.

@taxi

@mattheias12777

Ocazius

I've reviewed the message which was edited, and nothing was removed except for the spoiler. That being said, I have no clue what the fuck the point in that actually was, and if I w...

mattheias12777 2025-10-03 05:40 p.m.

Yes, your Honor.

mattheias12777 2025-10-03 05:40 p.m.

I will not redo my previous actions.

taxi 2025-10-03 05:45 p.m.

LOL

taxi 2025-10-03 05:46 p.m.

@Ocazius

can we strike these two please ur honour

taxi

@Ocazius can we strike these two please ur honour

Ocazius 2025-10-03 05:48 p.m.

Yes, for the sake of efficiency

taxi

@mattheias12777 You testified that you believe the defendant had intent when he took the actions, right?

Ocazius 2025-10-03 05:49 p.m.

@mattheias12777

Please answer sir

taxi

@mattheias12777 You testified that you believe the defendant had intent when he took the actions, right?

mattheias12777 2025-10-03 05:50 p.m.

yes

taxi 2025-10-03 06:00 p.m.

@mattheias12777

Is it probable tht the defendant thought they were carrying out a lawful duty by moving the victim's vehicles?

taxi

@mattheias12777 Is it probable tht the defendant thought they were carrying out a lawful duty by moving the victim's vehicles?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-03 06:00 p.m.

Objection, speculation @Ocazius

taxi 2025-10-03 06:01 p.m.

he literally testified that he thinks the defendant had intent

taxi 2025-10-03 06:01 p.m.

he can testify to that

taxi 2025-10-03 06:01 p.m.

if he can't then he can't testify as to whether he thinks the defendant had intent

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-03 06:02 p.m.

Ok withdrawn @taxi

taxi

@mattheias12777 Is it probable tht the defendant thought they were carrying out a lawful duty by moving the victim's vehicles?

mattheias12777 2025-10-03 06:08 p.m.

mattheias12777

taxi 2025-10-03 06:12 p.m.

Do you believe the defendant had the intention to permanently depive the victims of their vehicles?

taxi

Do you believe the defendant had the intention to permanently depive the victims of their vehicles?

mattheias12777 2025-10-03 06:17 p.m.

I don't believe you can permanently deprive a service vehicle from an agent

mattheias12777 2025-10-03 06:17 p.m.

So no

mattheias12777 2025-10-03 06:18 p.m.

That might be up to the judge to decide

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-04 08:12 p.m.

@taxi

Ocazius 2025-10-05 08:35 a.m.

@taxi

Please

taxi 2025-10-05 08:54 a.m.

@mattheias12777

You testified that the defendant hit DivineMissile, right?

taxi

@mattheias12777 You testified that the defendant hit DivineMissile, right?

mattheias12777 2025-10-05 09:01 a.m.

Yes, visible in exhibit B

taxi 2025-10-05 09:06 a.m.

@mattheias12777

As shown in Exhibit B, which part of the vehicle hit DivineMissile?

taxi

@mattheias12777 As shown in Exhibit B, which part of the vehicle hit DivineMissile?

mattheias12777 2025-10-05 09:07 a.m.

In the eyes of DivineMissile it was the left rear-door area. Can be different due to desync ingame

taxi 2025-10-05 09:07 a.m.

@Ocazius

move to strike

taxi 2025-10-05 09:07 a.m.

hearsay

mattheias12777

In the eyes of DivineMissile it was the left rear-door area. Can be different due to desync ingame

Ocazius 2025-10-05 09:08 a.m.

Stricken

taxi

@Ocazius move to strike

Ocazius 2025-10-05 09:08 a.m.

Stricken*

taxi 2025-10-05 09:09 a.m.

Could the witness actually stop being a smartass

taxi 2025-10-05 09:09 a.m.

And answer the questions

taxi 2025-10-05 09:09 a.m.

It's insufferable

taxi

Could the witness actually stop being a smartass

mattheias12777 2025-10-05 09:09 a.m.

I find this statement pretty rude

taxi 2025-10-05 09:09 a.m.

@mattheias12777

As shown in Exhibit B, which part of the vehicle hit DivineMissile?

mattheias12777 2025-10-05 09:10 a.m.

Rear left area

taxi 2025-10-05 09:11 a.m.

@mattheias12777

Would DivineMissile have been hit if he wasn't running towards the vehicle

taxi

@mattheias12777 Would DivineMissile have been hit if he wasn't running towards the vehicle

mattheias12777 2025-10-05 09:15 a.m.

Likely not, he'd have to move away from his vehicle though

mattheias12777 2025-10-05 09:16 a.m.

Can i resend exhibit b because its annoying to scroll all the way up on phone

taxi 2025-10-05 09:16 a.m.

yes

mattheias12777 2025-10-05 09:16 a.m.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AJYyqIXNmcTnXTIuVf6SEQusCQ4L2deb/view

lSDugjFcfvJIp8baXLb9XhR.mp4

taxi 2025-10-05 09:17 a.m.

@mattheias12777

Considering the direction the defendant was driving in the vehicle, it would be fair to say that the defendant wasn't acting maliciously or willfully when he hit the DivineMissile?

taxi 2025-10-05 09:18 a.m.

Withdrawn

taxi 2025-10-05 09:18 a.m.

@mattheias12777

Considering the direction the defendant was driving in the vehicle, it would be fair to say that the defendant wasn't acting maliciously or willfully when he hit the DivineMissile, right?

taxi 2025-10-05 09:18 a.m.

answer that

taxi

@mattheias12777 Considering the direction the defendant was driving in the vehicle, it would be fair to say that the defendant wasn't acting maliciously or willfully when he ...

mattheias12777 2025-10-05 09:20 a.m.

No, he did not willfully drive over Divinemissile, though I still stick to my standpoint of him driving recklessly with intent

mattheias12777

No, he did not willfully drive over Divinemissile, though I still stick to my standpoint of him driving recklessly with intent

mattheias12777 2025-10-05 09:21 a.m.

Atleast, thats what I think so. I cannot know what the defendant was thinking but can only give my view

taxi

Could the witness actually stop being a smartass

acarlyle 2025-10-05 09:42 a.m.

Is this really necessary Your Honor? @Ocazius

taxi

Could the witness actually stop being a smartass

Ocazius 2025-10-05 09:46 a.m.

@taxi

Don't say these sorts of things please

Ocazius 2025-10-05 09:46 a.m.

However, @mattheias12777 , I warn you to cut the sarcasm and cheek please.

mattheias12777

No, he did not willfully drive over Divinemissile, though I still stick to my standpoint of him driving recklessly with intent

taxi 2025-10-05 09:55 a.m.

So why did you write in your affidavit of probable cause "The defendant showed clear intent to assault Deputy DivineMissile?"

taxi 2025-10-05 09:56 a.m.

taxi

So why did you write in your affidavit of probable cause "The defendant showed clear intent to assault Deputy DivineMissile?"

mattheias12777 2025-10-05 09:59 a.m.

When he was driving recklessly, he acknowledged that he was endangering his life, as well as the life of others.

mattheias12777 2025-10-05 09:59 a.m.

He took measures to bruteforce his way in the patrol vehicle to then drive off, had he stopped to wait for the red light, this would'nt have happened

mattheias12777 2025-10-05 09:59 a.m.

Wouldn't*

mattheias12777 2025-10-05 10:00 a.m.

This = driving over divinemissile

taxi 2025-10-05 10:00 a.m.

But you just said he didn't willfully drive over DivineMissil. Surely if he acknowleged that he was endangering his life, that would suggest wilfullness?

taxi 2025-10-05 10:03 a.m.

Gonna withdrawn that question, you've already contradicted yourself.

taxi 2025-10-05 10:03 a.m.

@mattheias12777

When did you receieve the report?

taxi 2025-10-05 10:04 a.m.

(Of the incidents)

taxi

@mattheias12777 When did you receieve the report?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-05 10:04 a.m.

Objection, narrative

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-05 10:05 a.m.

@Ocazius

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-05 10:05 a.m.

The Agent receives many reports, this question is just confusing.

taxi 2025-10-05 10:05 a.m.

I literally just said of the incidents

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-05 10:05 a.m.

Which incidents?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-05 10:05 a.m.

The bombing of the port authority building?

taxi 2025-10-05 10:06 a.m.

I'm sure the witness has critical thinking capabilities and knows that the incidents im referring to are the ones my client is being prosecuted for

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-05 10:06 a.m.

The law is a specific endeavour Counsel.

acarlyle 2025-10-05 06:28 p.m.

couldn't even get the suits reference right... precise not specific

acarlyle

couldn't even get the suits reference right... precise not specific

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-05 06:33 p.m.

Suits reference?

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-08 01:33 p.m.

@Ocazius

Your honour?

Ocazius 2025-10-08 01:34 p.m.

Deepest apologies, thought I ruled on this

AlbertBlackwell

The Agent receives many reports, this question is just confusing.

Ocazius 2025-10-08 01:34 p.m.

Overruled

Ocazius 2025-10-08 01:35 p.m.

It's frivolous

Ocazius 2025-10-08 01:35 p.m.

@taxi

taxi 2025-10-08 02:10 p.m.

@mattheias12777

repsond

taxi 2025-10-08 02:10 p.m.

ill repeat

taxi 2025-10-08 02:10 p.m.

But you just said he didn't willfully drive over DivineMissil. Surely if he acknowleged that he was endangering his life, that would suggest wilfullness?

taxi 2025-10-08 02:11 p.m.

You can read back the transcript to remind yourself if youre unsure

taxi 2025-10-09 11:30 a.m.

@mattheias12777

respodn

taxi 2025-10-09 11:30 a.m.

the question

taxi

But you just said he didn't willfully drive over DivineMissil. Surely if he acknowleged that he was endangering his life, that would suggest wilfullness?

mattheias12777 2025-10-09 01:14 p.m.

Wilfulness to what

mattheias12777 2025-10-09 01:14 p.m.

Theres a difference between intent on harming the deputy and willfulness to harming himself whilst driving recklessly

mattheias12777 2025-10-09 01:16 p.m.

He willfully drove reckless meaning he knows he's endangering his life

mattheias12777

He willfully drove reckless meaning he knows he's endangering his life

taxi 2025-10-09 01:32 p.m.

@Ocazius

Objection

taxi 2025-10-09 01:32 p.m.

No way he can know what the defendant thinks

mattheias12777

He willfully drove reckless meaning he knows he's endangering his life

Ocazius 2025-10-09 01:33 p.m.

Stricken

Ocazius 2025-10-09 01:33 p.m.

Whole answer is stricken actually

Ocazius 2025-10-09 01:33 p.m.

@mattheias12777

Please answer properly

mattheias12777 2025-10-09 01:34 p.m.

Wilfulness to what

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-09 05:34 p.m.

@taxi

taxi 2025-10-10 03:34 p.m.

Give me a day

taxi 2025-10-10 03:34 p.m.

I've got an exam tomorrow (Yes, I know it's Saturday tomorrow)

Ocazius 2025-10-11 11:00 a.m.

@taxi

taxi 2025-10-11 12:43 p.m.

@mattheias12777

My question is, do you think the defendant wilfully hit DivineMIssile with a vehicle?

mattheias12777 2025-10-11 12:44 p.m.

Yea i think he intentionally did, that is my personal opinion

taxi 2025-10-11 12:46 p.m.

@Ocazius

Motion to strike, the witness isn't here to give his personal opinion but rather an objective answer based on his 'expertise'

Ocazius 2025-10-11 01:46 p.m.

@mattheias12777

No need to add that final part

Ocazius 2025-10-11 01:46 p.m.

Please answer again

mattheias12777 2025-10-11 02:15 p.m.

yes

taxi 2025-10-11 03:59 p.m.

@mattheias12777

So why did you say in an earlier question "No, he did not willfully drive over DivineMissile"

mattheias12777 2025-10-11 04:25 p.m.

Because he was on the trajectory of hitting him no matter if he steered right or not

mattheias12777 2025-10-11 04:26 p.m.

And because of divine's proximity to the car due to him trying to resist the car being stolen

mattheias12777 2025-10-11 04:27 p.m.

But, he willfully drove reckless once again

mattheias12777 2025-10-11 04:27 p.m.

And this coulve been avoided

mattheias12777 2025-10-11 04:27 p.m.

It's in between honestly

taxi 2025-10-11 05:31 p.m.

@Ocazius

I move to strike this witness' testimony in its entirety.

Clear contradictions in speech and he has perjured himself.

Earlier he was asked "Considering the direction the defendant was driving in the vehicle, it would be fair to say that the defendant wasn't acting maliciously or willfully when he hit the DivineMissile, right?" to which he responded "No, he did not willfully drive over Divinemissile, [...]"

Now when I asked him "do you think the defendant wilfully hit DivineMIssile with a vehicle?"

He responded with "yes"

taxi 2025-10-11 05:31 p.m.

I also move for sanctions against the witness

Ocazius 2025-10-12 04:16 a.m.

@AlbertBlackwell

@acarlyle

Ocazius 2025-10-12 04:16 a.m.

Lads, this witness is off the hook

Ocazius 2025-10-12 04:16 a.m.

I'm going to strike the testimony in full, if you'd like a written ruling then let me know.

Ocazius 2025-10-12 04:23 a.m.

I will not be disqualifying the witness from his expert position, or excusing him from the stand, as neither party wishes to raise the point, however I have the discretion to do so, and will conduct such an action, if the next testimony continues to repeatedly contradict itself and prove unreliable.

Ocazius

I'm going to strike the testimony in full, if you'd like a written ruling then let me know.

acarlyle 2025-10-12 05:02 a.m.

Contradiction isnt a reason to strike his entire testimony… We’d like a full written ruling.

Ocazius 2025-10-12 06:13 a.m.

Will write later today.

acarlyle 2025-10-12 01:20 p.m.

@Ocazius

you can forget abt a written

acarlyle 2025-10-12 01:20 p.m.

There is no point. State Rests.

Ocazius 2025-10-12 01:21 p.m.

Alright

Ocazius 2025-10-12 01:22 p.m.

@taxi

I'd like you to restart your cross of this witness.

acarlyle 2025-10-12 01:22 p.m.

hold on, clarification. Are you only striking the cross testimony?

Ocazius 2025-10-12 01:22 p.m.

I am of course not striking his initial examination.

acarlyle 2025-10-12 01:22 p.m.

Ok.

acarlyle

hold on, clarification. Are you only striking the cross testimony?

Ocazius 2025-10-12 01:22 p.m.

Yes, his cross testimony is stricken in full.

Ocazius 2025-10-12 01:22 p.m.

Apologies for not making that more clear earlier, I realise what it read now.

Ocazius 2025-10-12 01:23 p.m.

@taxi

taxi 2025-10-12 01:49 p.m.

@acarlyle

Why doesn't state prosecute him for perjury

taxi 2025-10-12 01:49 p.m.

@Ocazius

This hardly seems fair, the State has just been let off with a lying witness and his witness has perjured themselves

taxi 2025-10-12 01:49 p.m.

and now they're getting a second chance

taxi 2025-10-12 01:49 p.m.

as if there isn't already any added prejudice towards my client

taxi

@acarlyle Why doesn't state prosecute him for perjury

acarlyle 2025-10-12 01:50 p.m.

We'll decide that for ourselves, thanks.

acarlyle 2025-10-12 01:50 p.m.

But if you dont want to cross examine, we rest our case.

taxi 2025-10-12 01:52 p.m.

@Ocazius

i move for the court to order the prosecution to show cause as to why their witness' initial testimony shouldn't also be stricken

My client has been prejudiced as a result of his perjury

acarlyle 2025-10-12 01:54 p.m.

If the witness had got on the stand and intentionally lied, I'd certainly agree, but he didnt. This is nothing more than a simple case of a witness getting confused because the Defense Counsel wants to ask intentionally confusing questions.

taxi 2025-10-12 01:55 p.m.

"intetionally confusing questions"

taxi 2025-10-12 01:55 p.m.

or perhaps ur supposed witness lacks basic cognitive abilites

taxi 2025-10-12 01:55 p.m.

either way, you dont

taxi 2025-10-12 01:56 p.m.

dont know*

acarlyle 2025-10-12 02:13 p.m.

If the opposing counsel doesnt want to continue, I ask that you waive their cross and then defense can move to their case @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-10-12 02:20 p.m.

@taxi

Considering the witness' lack of legal experience, I have stricken his cross testimony. He knows that he is now on his final warning, before I strike it all and excuse him. I cannot and will not order a prosecution into a witness, and it is on you now to prove through your fresh cross examination that he has perjured himself in his initial, valid testimony.

Ocazius 2025-10-12 02:20 p.m.

Begin please.

Ocazius

@taxi Considering the witness' lack of legal experience, I have stricken his cross testimony. He knows that he is now on his final warning, before I strike it all a...

taxi 2025-10-12 02:25 p.m.

He perjured himself in cross though

taxi 2025-10-12 02:26 p.m.

@mattheias12777

You testified that the defendant hit DivineMissile, right?

mattheias12777 2025-10-12 02:27 p.m.

Yes

taxi 2025-10-12 02:45 p.m.

@mattheias12777

As shown in Exhibit B, which part of the vehicle hit DivineMissile?

taxi

@mattheias12777 As shown in Exhibit B, which part of the vehicle hit DivineMissile?

mattheias12777 2025-10-12 03:07 p.m.

Left rear corner

mattheias12777

Left rear corner

taxi 2025-10-12 03:37 p.m.

The defendant was driving away from DivineMissile, correct?

taxi

The defendant was driving away from DivineMissile, correct?

mattheias12777 2025-10-12 03:38 p.m.

Yes

taxi 2025-10-13 01:27 p.m.

@mattheias12777

The defendant therefore couldn't have intended to hit DIvineMissile, right?

taxi

@mattheias12777 The defendant therefore couldn't have intended to hit DIvineMissile, right?

mattheias12777 2025-10-13 02:48 p.m.

mattheias12777

taxi 2025-10-13 04:07 p.m.

DivineMissile was running towards the vehicle the defendant was occupying, right?

taxi

DivineMissile was running towards the vehicle the defendant was occupying, right?

mattheias12777 2025-10-13 04:45 p.m.

Yes

mattheias12777

Yes

taxi 2025-10-13 04:46 p.m.

So how could the defendant have intended to hit DivineMissile when he was driving away from them?

taxi

So how could the defendant have intended to hit DivineMissile when he was driving away from them?

mattheias12777 2025-10-13 04:59 p.m.

Ukranian was driving fast and reckless

mattheias12777

Ukranian was driving fast and reckless

taxi 2025-10-13 05:03 p.m.

Is it possible to run someone over that's behind you if you're driving quickly away from them?

taxi

Is it possible to run someone over that's behind you if you're driving quickly away from them?

mattheias12777 2025-10-13 05:11 p.m.

Yes

mattheias12777

Yes

taxi 2025-10-13 06:21 p.m.

How is that physically possible

mattheias12777 2025-10-14 12:59 a.m.

Look at exhibit b

mattheias12777

Look at exhibit b

taxi 2025-10-14 10:35 a.m.

I’m asking you to explain

Ocazius 2025-10-14 10:43 a.m.

@mattheias12777

Come on bud

Ocazius 2025-10-14 10:44 a.m.

'Look at exhibit b' is not appropriate.

Ocazius 2025-10-14 10:44 a.m.

This is your second chance at cross testimony, please be a bit more serious.

mattheias12777 2025-10-14 10:44 a.m.

Sorry, will write when i'm home

mattheias12777 2025-10-14 12:05 p.m.

Yes, it is possible for someone that is positioned near the vehicle's rear part to be struck with a fleeing vehicle. When a driver applies acceleration, the rear of the vehicle can start skidding due to loss of traction, especially if the driver starts to turn.This rotational movement causes the rear corners to swing outward, capable of striking anyone standing near the chassis of the vehicle.

mattheias12777

Yes, it is possible for someone that is positioned near the vehicle's rear part to be struck with a fleeing vehicle. When a driver applies acceleration, the rear of the vehicle can...

taxi 2025-10-14 12:52 p.m.

And your testimony today is that the vehicle started skidding, due to a loss of traction which is the reason as to why DivineMissile was hit?

mattheias12777 2025-10-14 01:37 p.m.

No. I wasn’t stating that the vehicle did skid, I was giving an example of how such contact could occur in tthe situation that I was describing. My earlier explanation was hypothetical, illustrating that when a driver accelerates and turns, the rear of a vehicle can swing outward, making contact possible. The evidence itself doesn’t confirm whether there was an actual skid, only that contact occurred at the rear corner.

Ocazius

'Look at exhibit b' is not appropriate.

acarlyle 2025-10-14 02:26 p.m.

Your Honor, that is perfectly appropriate. He was demonstrating how it was possible by linking it to the evidence.

Ocazius 2025-10-14 02:28 p.m.

Then he could have explained using Exhibit B.

@taxi

Next question please.

taxi 2025-10-14 02:32 p.m.

@Ocazius

This witness is hardly an expert

taxi 2025-10-14 02:33 p.m.

How can anyone with sound mind say yes to "Is it possible to run someone over that's behind you if you're driving quickly away from them?"

taxi 2025-10-14 02:33 p.m.

I don't understand what I'm supposed to do when the witness is simply lying

taxi

@Ocazius This witness is hardly an expert

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-14 05:31 p.m.

@Ocazius

We move to strike this comment

taxi

I don't understand what I'm supposed to do when the witness is simply lying

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-14 05:32 p.m.

Along with this

taxi

How can anyone with sound mind say yes to "Is it possible to run someone over that's behind you if you're driving quickly away from them?"

acarlyle 2025-10-14 06:35 p.m.

Probably because that is the case

acarlyle 2025-10-14 06:36 p.m.

Idk, just thinking out loud….

Ocazius 2025-10-15 02:34 a.m.

@taxi

Striking your three messages, not sure what that was...

Ocazius 2025-10-15 02:35 a.m.

You either raise an objection or you don't, you can't just randomly state your opinion of an answer with no aim

taxi 2025-10-15 03:43 p.m.

@Ocazius

Well I move to strike this testimony in full because what he's saying is pure lie and not true

As you can see here in this heavily detailed diagram, it is quite literally impossible for two parallel objects to meet

taxi 2025-10-15 03:44 p.m.

And in the context of the case, while the defendant was driving away, he was parallel to DivineMIssile (as clearly visibile in the clip)

taxi 2025-10-15 03:44 p.m.

This witness is no expert

taxi 2025-10-15 03:45 p.m.

And his testimony, including direct, should be struck in full as he's had multiple warnings regarding his improper testimony, his refusal to answer questions properly and furthermore, I move for perhaps this third time now for sanctions against him

Ocazius 2025-10-15 03:45 p.m.

@acarlyle

Response

acarlyle 2025-10-15 05:18 p.m.

Well, if we struck testimony that we didnt like, there would be no testimony inany case. Full response soon, I’m driving rn

taxi 2025-10-15 05:43 p.m.

How is Matthew allowed on the road

taxi 2025-10-15 05:43 p.m.

He can’t be above the age of 13

taxi 2025-10-15 05:43 p.m.

I retract

taxi

He can’t be above the age of 13

acarlyle 2025-10-15 05:46 p.m.

Must be an off night Counsellor. You’ve gotta to better than that to get a reaction

taxi

@Ocazius Well I move to strike this testimony in full because what he's saying is pure lie and not true As you can see here in this heavily detailed diagram, it is q...

acarlyle 2025-10-15 05:49 p.m.

Move to strike this, not admitted into evidence, and was never disclosed at the start of trial. However, it does look like he might have a future at Art School - so long as he doesnt hate jews!

acarlyle 2025-10-15 05:49 p.m.

@Ocazius

acarlyle 2025-10-15 05:49 p.m.

I withdraw my latter remark

acarlyle 2025-10-15 05:51 p.m.

At no point has the witness lied. He was giving his expert opinion about how this all went down, just because the Defense Counsel doesn’t like it, it doesnt justify striking his whole testimony.

Since you struck the cross, his testimony has been proper, apart from one misunderstanding, the only person who was reprimanded in the most recent cross was Defense Counsel for not properly raising motions to strike.

The only proper venue for this sort of rebuttal is in defense’s case, this is not appropriate for a motion to strike. @Ocazius

acarlyle 2025-10-15 05:53 p.m.

Defense counsel is fully aware of this too, so when he wants to raise his speedy trial again, would the court please remind him that his frivolous motions and overly long examinations are the reason that this is taking so long.

Ocazius 2025-10-16 03:22 p.m.

@acarlyle

@taxi

Firstly, step out of your Netflix bubble, one more of these type comments which you immediately retract for comedic/dramatic effect, and you will be fined.

@taxi

I'm not striking an entire testimony because you allege that the laws of physics do not align with testimony. If you wish to challenge the credibility of the witness, then do so by raising such a challenge, not trying to strike the entire testimony. Your move is overruled.

acarlyle 2025-10-16 03:24 p.m.

Thank you Your Honor.

taxi 2025-10-16 03:36 p.m.

Right well then no further questions for this witness

Ocazius 2025-10-16 03:42 p.m.

Alright

Ocazius 2025-10-16 03:42 p.m.

@acarlyle

acarlyle 2025-10-16 03:44 p.m.

The State has no more witnesses. We rest. @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-10-16 04:02 p.m.

@taxi

taxi 2025-10-16 04:04 p.m.

I call @baker to the stand

taxi 2025-10-16 04:07 p.m.

@Ocazius

Ocazius used

/add

clerkFlow Bot2025-10-16 04:11 p.m.

Case Modified

@Ocazius

has added @baker to the case channel.

Ocazius used

/administeroath

clerkFlow Bot2025-10-16 04:11 p.m.

@baker

(edited)

Oath Selection

Which type of oath would you like to swear to?

Religious

- Involves swearing to god that your testimony is, or will be, truthful.

Non-Religious

- Solemnly affirms that your testimony is, or will be, truthful, under the pains and penalties of perjury.

Religious Oath

Non-Religious Oath

Ocazius 2025-10-16 04:11 p.m.

@baker

Click one of the above and then respond as prompted.

BotclerkFlow

@baker

clerkFlow Bot2025-10-16 05:06 p.m.

@baker

Religious Oath

Do you solemnly swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, so help you god?

baker 2025-10-16 05:06 p.m.

yes

Ocazius 2025-10-16 05:17 p.m.

@baker

Beginneth

taxi 2025-10-16 05:56 p.m.

@baker

could you please state your name for the record

baker 2025-10-16 06:14 p.m.

ukraniantrucking

taxi 2025-10-17 04:33 p.m.

@baker

Are you a citizen of the State of Mayflower?

baker 2025-10-17 05:55 p.m.

yes

taxi 2025-10-18 03:48 p.m.

On the 7th of August 2025, were you carrying out duties as a security officer?

acarlyle 2025-10-18 05:01 p.m.

Objection, leading @Ocazius

acarlyle 2025-10-19 08:05 a.m.

@Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-10-19 08:30 a.m.

Apologies, missed that

acarlyle

Objection, leading @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-10-19 08:30 a.m.

Sustained

Ocazius 2025-10-19 08:31 a.m.

@taxi

Rephrase and ramp up your questioning speeds please

taxi 2025-10-19 09:19 a.m.

@baker

What were you doing on the 7th of August of 2025?

baker 2025-10-19 11:38 a.m.

i was at the courthouse as a security guard guarding it

baker

i was at the courthouse as a security guard guarding it

taxi 2025-10-19 12:55 p.m.

Did you encounter DivineMissile during your time guarding?

baker 2025-10-19 01:03 p.m.

yes

baker

yes

taxi 2025-10-19 02:08 p.m.

What happened when you encountered him?

taxi

What happened when you encountered him?

baker 2025-10-19 02:49 p.m.

i moved his car

baker

i moved his car

taxi 2025-10-19 05:05 p.m.

Why did you move his car?

taxi

Why did you move his car?

baker 2025-10-19 06:15 p.m.

i was given a directive by a law enforcement officer to move parked vehicles

baker

i was given a directive by a law enforcement officer to move parked vehicles

taxi 2025-10-20 02:15 p.m.

Where did you take his vehicle?

taxi

Where did you take his vehicle?

baker 2025-10-20 02:56 p.m.

his vehicle was in a zone designated as no parking by the commissioner of lcpd

baker

his vehicle was in a zone designated as no parking by the commissioner of lcpd

taxi 2025-10-20 03:09 p.m.

@Ocazius

move to strike for non responsive

taxi 2025-10-20 03:09 p.m.

@baker

I think you misunderstood

baker 2025-10-20 03:09 p.m.

sorry yeah i misread that

taxi 2025-10-20 03:10 p.m.

no worries

baker 2025-10-20 03:10 p.m.

i took his car infront of the court house

taxi 2025-10-20 03:10 p.m.

Who gave you the directive to move his vehicle?

taxi

Who gave you the directive to move his vehicle?

baker 2025-10-20 03:10 p.m.

the lcpd commissioner 101_waves

taxi 2025-10-20 03:10 p.m.

Did you encounter Sectionism during your time guarding?

taxi

Did you encounter Sectionism during your time guarding?

baker 2025-10-20 03:10 p.m.

yes

taxi 2025-10-20 03:11 p.m.

What happened when you encountered him?

baker 2025-10-20 03:11 p.m.

he was told he couldnt park there and was told by 101 waves to move his vehicle shortly after that i moved the vehicle myself

taxi 2025-10-20 03:12 p.m.

Where did you take his vehicle?

baker 2025-10-20 03:13 p.m.

to the side of the courthouse like near the labs building

taxi 2025-10-20 03:14 p.m.

@baker

When you were moving DivineMIssiles car, did you hit him with the vehicle?

baker 2025-10-20 03:14 p.m.

yes he was struct

baker

yes he was struct

taxi 2025-10-20 03:15 p.m.

Which part of the vehicle struck him?

baker 2025-10-20 03:15 p.m.

left rear

taxi 2025-10-20 03:15 p.m.

Did you intend to hit him?

baker 2025-10-20 03:15 p.m.

taxi 2025-10-20 03:15 p.m.

Were you driving away from DivineMissile when he was hit?

baker 2025-10-20 03:15 p.m.

yes

taxi 2025-10-20 03:16 p.m.

What did DivineMissile do as you were driving away from him?

baker 2025-10-20 03:17 p.m.

he chased me on foot after his vehicle

taxi 2025-10-20 03:21 p.m.

When you took away DivineMissile's vehicle, what were you intending to do with it?

taxi 2025-10-20 03:21 p.m.

@baker

baker 2025-10-20 03:21 p.m.

park it where everyone was instructed to park by 101 waves

baker 2025-10-20 03:21 p.m.

the side of the lander courthouse by labs

taxi 2025-10-20 03:22 p.m.

When you took away Sectionism's vehicle, what were you intending to do with it?

baker 2025-10-20 03:22 p.m.

park it where everyone was instructed to park by 101waves, the side of the lander courthouse by labs

taxi 2025-10-20 03:22 p.m.

@Ocazius

@acarlyle

nothing further

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:35 p.m.

It is your testimony, that you were at the Lander Courthouse acting as a Security Guard, Correct? @baker

acarlyle

It is your testimony, that you were at the Lander Courthouse acting as a Security Guard, Correct? @baker

baker 2025-10-20 03:38 p.m.

yes

baker

yes

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:39 p.m.

Yes or no, you dont have a Security license though do you?

baker 2025-10-20 03:39 p.m.

yes, i dont have a license

baker 2025-10-20 03:40 p.m.

oh sorry i meant no, i dont have a security license

baker

oh sorry i meant no, i dont have a security license

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:40 p.m.

It is also your testimony that you moved the victim's vehicles, correct?

acarlyle

It is also your testimony that you moved the victim's vehicles, correct?

baker 2025-10-20 03:40 p.m.

yes

baker

yes

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:40 p.m.

yes or no, Are you a parking enforcement officer?

baker 2025-10-20 03:40 p.m.

i am not a parking enforcement officer

baker

i am not a parking enforcement officer

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:41 p.m.

So why did you decide to try and enforce parking law?

baker 2025-10-20 03:41 p.m.

i was given a directive by law enforcement to move the vehicles so i followed that directive

baker

i was given a directive by law enforcement to move the vehicles so i followed that directive

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:42 p.m.

Seen as you decided you wanted to enforce parking Law, you will be aware that Law Enforcement are exempt from Title 2 offenses, right?

acarlyle

Seen as you decided you wanted to enforce parking Law, you will be aware that Law Enforcement are exempt from Title 2 offenses, right?

baker 2025-10-20 03:43 p.m.

yes i am aware, but the chief parking enforcement officer of lander city, 101_waves instructed that absolutely no one park infront of the courthouse

baker

yes i am aware, but the chief parking enforcement officer of lander city, 101_waves instructed that absolutely no one park infront of the courthouse

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:45 p.m.

Yes or No. Did you have access to Law Enforcement vehicles?

baker 2025-10-20 03:45 p.m.

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:45 p.m.

So you had to smash into the vehicles to move them, right?

baker 2025-10-20 03:45 p.m.

yes

baker

yes

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:46 p.m.

You didn't do that by accident, right?

baker 2025-10-20 03:46 p.m.

yes

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:46 p.m.

You did that by accident?

baker 2025-10-20 03:46 p.m.

i did not do it by accident

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:47 p.m.

Thank you for clarifying.

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:47 p.m.

You didnt have permission from the victim's to utilize their vehicles, correct?

baker 2025-10-20 03:47 p.m.

thats correct

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:47 p.m.

You, as a "security guard", understand that Law Enforcement Operations take priority over your security operations, correct?

baker 2025-10-20 03:48 p.m.

yes

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:50 p.m.

Its your testimony that you drove the victim's vehicles to the side of the Labs building, correct? @baker

baker 2025-10-20 03:50 p.m.

yes

baker 2025-10-20 03:50 p.m.

side of the courthouse by the labs building

baker

yes

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:50 p.m.

Would you agree with the Prosecution's witness' assessment that your driving was reckless?

acarlyle

Would you agree with the Prosecution's witness' assessment that your driving was reckless?

baker 2025-10-20 03:51 p.m.

i dont agree with it

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:51 p.m.

So, you ran a red light, didnt take any care at the intersection, and sped off, but that's careful driving?

baker 2025-10-20 03:52 p.m.

i didnt say it was careful driving i just said i dont agree with his assessment that it was reckless

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:56 p.m.

Your testimony was that you struck DivineMissile with his vehicle after you took it, correct? @baker

baker 2025-10-20 03:57 p.m.

yes thats correct

baker

yes thats correct

acarlyle 2025-10-20 03:58 p.m.

But you didnt stop after striking him, did you?

taxi 2025-10-20 03:58 p.m.

objection relevance

taxi 2025-10-20 03:58 p.m.

@Ocazius

acarlyle 2025-10-20 04:00 p.m.

What's irrelevant about that? We're charging him with Felony Hit and Run

taxi 2025-10-20 04:00 p.m.

baker 2025-10-20 04:00 p.m.

so do i answer

taxi 2025-10-20 04:00 p.m.

im still objecting

baker 2025-10-20 04:00 p.m.

nvm

taxi 2025-10-20 04:00 p.m.

acc

taxi 2025-10-20 04:00 p.m.

withdrawn

taxi 2025-10-20 04:00 p.m.

@baker

u can answer

baker 2025-10-20 04:00 p.m.

yes i did not stop

baker

yes i did not stop

acarlyle 2025-10-20 04:01 p.m.

I see, so you struck Deputy DivineMissile, drove off with his vehicle, ran a red light and drove the wrong way on a roadway, Do you believe this was reckless?

baker 2025-10-20 04:02 p.m.

you want my opinion on whether it was reckless or not

acarlyle 2025-10-20 04:03 p.m.

i would like you to answer the question, yes

baker 2025-10-20 04:03 p.m.

well i dont believe thats reckless but thats just my opinion

taxi 2025-10-20 04:03 p.m.

objection

taxi 2025-10-20 04:03 p.m.

motion to strike

taxi 2025-10-20 04:03 p.m.

@Ocazius

why is the witness giving his opinion

taxi 2025-10-20 04:03 p.m.

not relevant

acarlyle

I see, so you struck Deputy DivineMissile, drove off with his vehicle, ran a red light and drove the wrong way on a roadway, Do you believe this was reckless?

taxi 2025-10-20 04:04 p.m.

also asked and answered

acarlyle 2025-10-20 04:04 p.m.

its a different question about different events

acarlyle 2025-10-20 04:04 p.m.

I have no further questions for this witness, State yields. @Ocazius

taxi

motion to strike

Ocazius 2025-10-20 04:26 p.m.

Question and answer struck

Ocazius 2025-10-20 04:26 p.m.

Witness is lay

Ocazius 2025-10-20 04:26 p.m.

@taxi

Any more witnesses?

taxi 2025-10-20 04:48 p.m.

uhh

taxi 2025-10-20 04:49 p.m.

@Ocazius

Give me a day

taxi 2025-10-22 08:15 a.m.

@Ocazius

none

Ocazius 2025-10-22 08:43 a.m.

Alright

Ocazius 2025-10-22 08:43 a.m.

@acarlyle

Ocazius 2025-10-22 08:43 a.m.

Ocazius

acarlyle 2025-10-22 05:23 p.m.

I'll attempt to get it done tonight, if not it'll be done tomorrow morning Your Honor.

Have you got a deadline for the Closing Statement?#

acarlyle

I'll attempt to get it done tonight, if not it'll be done tomorrow morning Your Honor. Have you got a deadline for the Closing Statement?#

Ocazius 2025-10-23 05:23 a.m.

I’ll just set a 24hr timer

Ocazius used

/timer

clerkFlow Bot2025-10-23 05:23 a.m.

Timer

Friday, October 24, 2025 at 5:23 a.m.

(3 months ago)

acarlyle 2025-10-23 05:33 a.m.

Thank you.

Ocazius 2025-10-24 07:03 a.m.

@acarlyle

I would have appreciated you telling me before that you waive your right to a CS, so I wouldn't have had to wait

Ocazius 2025-10-24 07:03 a.m.

@taxi

Closing Statement please

Ocazius

@acarlyle I would have appreciated you telling me before that you waive your right to a CS, so I wouldn't have had to wait

acarlyle 2025-10-24 07:11 a.m.

was never my intention to waive

Ocazius

@acarlyle I would have appreciated you telling me before that you waive your right to a CS, so I wouldn't have had to wait

acarlyle 2025-10-24 07:27 a.m.

I will deliver it now if you allow me to. Especially given the amount if ti

acarlyle 2025-10-24 07:30 a.m.

As you’re offline. I’ll deliver it, you can strike it if you dont want to give me the extra time. My apologies for missing the original deadline.

acarlyle 2025-10-24 07:48 a.m.

Your Honor, that concludes the State’s case against the Defendant, ukraniantrucking. At the start of this trial we told you that we have the undoubted burden to prove that the Defendant committed all 10 crimes as charged, we can confidently say that we have done that.

First you heard from Deputy DivineMissile, a Deputy in the Clark County Sheriff’s Office. Who said that the Defendant was walking around, asking who’s vehicles belong to who. Then he goes on to explain how the Defendant broke into his Patrol Vehicle, Stole it and drove off with it, and strikes the victim with the stolen vehicle. We heard how Deputy DivineMissile was hindered from responding to calls for service, or assisting his colleagues because of his vehicle being stolen.

Then we heard from Agent Sectionism of the MBI. Who details how the Defendant began to smash the windows of his unmarked patrol vehicle, whilst he is inside, after getting out and confronting the Defendant, the Defendant smashes the driver’s side window and drives off with the Agent’s vehicle. We also see the Agent detail about how he was severely limited in conducting his investigative duties as a result of the Defendant’s actions.

We then heard from Agent matheis, who shared his expert opinion on how the Defendant’s conduct met the requirements of each and every charge.

At the conclusion of the State’s case, the Defendant was called to the stand, in which he admits that he had no Security License - meaning he cannot act as a Security Guard by law. He admits that he isnt a Parking Enforcement Officer - so he cannot enforce parking law. He admits that he doesnt have access to law enforcement vehicles, which meets the requirements of breaking and entering, as he bypassed a physical restriction on the vehicles. He admits that he had the intent to break into these vehicles. He admits to not having the consent of the victims, he admits to not stopping after the victim was struck by him after stealing his car.

Your Honor, if the witness can Impersonate a Security Officer & contravene State Statute regarding parking & security enforcement, what makes us believe that he did not in fact commit each and every one of these crimes?

With that Your Honor, the State can say that throughout this trial we have proven both the Act & the Guilty Mind for each charge, and as such, we ask you to return a verdict of guilty to each and every charge.

Ocazius 2025-10-24 07:54 a.m.

@taxi

taxi 2025-10-24 11:14 a.m.

@Ocazius

Before I make my closing

taxi 2025-10-24 11:14 a.m.

I move for sanctions against the prosecution for their delay in the closing

taxi 2025-10-24 11:14 a.m.

He send it late

taxi 2025-10-24 11:14 a.m.

I don't think this should allowed

acarlyle 2025-10-24 11:45 a.m.

If we’re talking delays Your Honor, I think the Defense wins that, considering they took 3 days to ask 3 questions on their own Direct Examination

Ocazius 2025-10-24 11:58 a.m.

@taxi

Closing Statement please.

Ocazius 2025-10-24 11:58 a.m.

I’m not sanctioning anyone at this point in the trial

acarlyle

If we’re talking delays Your Honor, I think the Defense wins that, considering they took 3 days to ask 3 questions on their own Direct Examination

taxi 2025-10-24 03:54 p.m.

Oh sod off

Ocazius

@taxi Closing Statement please.

taxi 2025-10-24 03:54 p.m.

I’ll do it when im home your honour

taxi

Oh sod off

acarlyle 2025-10-24 03:55 p.m.

It is a matter of fact?

taxi 2025-10-24 05:15 p.m.

Just stop talking bro

taxi 2025-10-24 05:29 p.m.

As for count one, the charge of Grand Theft Auto, the State have failed to prove a crucial element which is the intention to permanently deprive. We have heard from testimony that the defendant moved the vehicle to somewhere which didn't appear to be legally parked. The witness' weren't permanently deprived of their vehicle and thus the court simply cannot convict him.

As for count two, the charge of breaking and entering, the State have again failed to prove intent. The defendant believed he was legally entitled to move the vehicles as he was ordered by law enforcement to do so. The defendant lacked the mens rea and thus the charge cannot be upheld in good faith.

As for count three, the charge of assault on Sectionism, we haven't heard about anything of the sort. The matter of an assault hasn't even been brought up during trial and therefore the State have failed to meet their burden. I'd also like to remind the court that in order to convict somebody of Assault, the State MUST show that the defendant acted willfully AND maliciously. The State have COMPLETELY failed in showing this, the matter of Assault hasn't been brought up, let alone whether the defendant was acting maliciosuly or willfully.

As for count four, the charge of OOJ, the state have failed to show how the duties of sectionism have been hindered. We have heard through testimony that Sectionism wasn't acting out any official duties at the time he lost his vehicle but rather he decided to clip the incident and file a report immediately after. This indicates that no duties were actually obstructed but rather Sectionism wasted time out of his own accord.

As for count 5, I urge the court to look at my statement for count 1 as it applies here.
As for count 6, I urge the court to look at my statement for count 2 as it applies here.

As for count 7, AWADW, the defendant simply did not wilfully strike any person. It was clearly established that the victim RAN TOWARDS the defendant in the vehicle...

taxi 2025-10-24 05:29 p.m.

(not finished, discord character count)

taxi 2025-10-24 05:33 p.m.

Through the exhibis and testimony, it's clear that 1. the defendant didn't wilfully strike the victim and 2. the victim wouldn't have been struck if he hadn't ran towards the vehicle. The State haven't shown the defendant was acting maliciously or willfully and thus have failed to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, the necessary mens rea required for AWADW.

As for count 8, Felony Hit and Run, the defendant had no knowledge that anybody was hit. One cannot be reasoably expected to stop if they don't have knowledge of an incident. The State haven't proved the necesary mens rea required to sucessfully convict the defendant for Felony hit and run.

As for count 9, I urge the court to look at my statement for count 4 as it applies.

As for count 10, reckless driving, the State haven't established through any testimony the quality of the defendants driving. We've no idea whether this has taken place or not and thus the burden of proof hasn't been met.

taxi 2025-10-24 05:33 p.m.

I yield. @Ocazius

Ocazius 2025-10-25 05:02 a.m.

Wonderful

taxi 2025-10-26 10:05 a.m.

we the court find the defendant not guilty and sentence matthewsandringham to death

taxi 2025-10-26 10:05 a.m.

https://tenor.com/view/sentenced-judge-gavel-life-guilty-gif-12475856

Ocazius 2025-10-26 02:32 p.m.

@bommes

Hi, are you happy to be the DCJ to rule on this case? I'll write and send you my recommended ruling if so.

Ocazius

@bommes Hi, are you happy to be the DCJ to rule on this case? I'll write and send you my recommended ruling if so.

bommes 2025-10-26 03:07 p.m.

Why’s that? You’ve seen it through until now

bommes

Why’s that? You’ve seen it through until now

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:08 p.m.

I meant just to confirm my ruling once I send it to you, to give it the big stamp of approval

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:08 p.m.

I don't need you to do anything other than rubber stamp

bommes 2025-10-26 03:08 p.m.

Oh right

bommes 2025-10-26 03:08 p.m.

Yeah send it on over when you’re done

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:08 p.m.

Actually according to the statutes I don't even think I need to

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:08 p.m.

Sorry to bother you big brother

bommes 2025-10-26 03:08 p.m.

Nah all good

bommes 2025-10-26 03:08 p.m.

Better to be safe than sorry

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:09 p.m.

You got that right

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:29 p.m.

@baker

@taxi

@acarlyle

@AlbertBlackwell

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:30 p.m.

Defendant is hereby found guilty of Counts 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10.

Defendant is sentenced to an incarceration lasting 240 minutes in the Clark County Correctional Facility.

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:30 p.m.

Ruling has been entered here:

https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1279836211703447614/1432088612589146223

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:31 p.m.

I thank you all for your time on this case, we got through it pretty quickly and testimony went smoothly (mostly), with minimal contempt issued.

taxi 2025-10-26 03:32 p.m.

baker 2025-10-26 03:32 p.m.

Honestly

taxi 2025-10-26 03:32 p.m.

the judiciary has failed once again

taxi 2025-10-26 03:32 p.m.

death to matthewsandringham

taxi 2025-10-26 03:32 p.m.

off with his head

baker 2025-10-26 03:32 p.m.

https://tenor.com/view/jeffrey-epstein-creeper-walk-gif-2956154583783650651

taxi

death to matthewsandringham

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-26 03:32 p.m.

@Ocazius

Your honour?

taxi 2025-10-26 03:33 p.m.

bro u won the case

taxi 2025-10-26 03:33 p.m.

have a day off

taxi 2025-10-26 03:33 p.m.

https://tenor.com/view/epico-gif-10005337172608430078

baker 2025-10-26 03:33 p.m.

Your honor thats Mb

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:37 p.m.

MINUTE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

On the 26th of December, 2025, Defense Counsel OperatorTaxi sent a gif stating 'Your Honour, shut the fuck up because you weren't even there', as well as calling for the beheading and murder of opposing counsel MatthewSandringham.

This conduct is flagrantly and inherently disrespectful to the court and other parties of the court and to the administration of Justice as well as the safety of MatthewSandringham, therefore:

@taxi

is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing before 12 hours time, as to why the court should not hold him in contempt for his conduct.

taxi 2025-10-26 03:37 p.m.

Ocazius

MINUTE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE On the 26th of December, 2025, Defense Counsel OperatorTaxi sent a gif stating 'Your Honour, shut the fuck up because you weren't even there', as we...

taxi 2025-10-26 03:37 p.m.

Do I have to man

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:37 p.m.

Is that your official response?

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:37 p.m.

Your official response is noted.

taxi 2025-10-26 03:39 p.m.

no i have a response

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:40 p.m.

Final chance to be serious.

Ocazius

MINUTE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE On the 26th of December, 2025, Defense Counsel OperatorTaxi sent a gif stating 'Your Honour, shut the fuck up because you weren't even there', as we...

taxi 2025-10-26 03:42 p.m.

response:

This is a major first amendment attack. The case is over and thus there is no impediment on any administration of justice. My client will be taking his sentence like a good boy and I urge the court that we get this case over with. Additionally, matthewsandringham is an insufferable illegal immigrant who should be deported from Clark. I make no apology for expressing my opinion on him.

taxi 2025-10-26 03:44 p.m.

He thinks he's a good attorney because he's won a prosecution despite it being the easiest job in all of lego law.

taxi 2025-10-26 03:44 p.m.

https://media.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExODh6MWx0dTl0ZHJodWExeG1hcTVzY2Z2OGc1cjU1N2ExMzc4dTlsNCZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/VYAr8rclQAlRDEswwq/giphy.gif

taxi 2025-10-26 03:44 p.m.

Exhibit A your honour

taxi 2025-10-26 03:44 p.m.

Matthew cannot actually practice law if it isn't prosecution

baker 2025-10-26 03:44 p.m.

taxi 2025-10-26 03:45 p.m.

Which is clearly portrayed through this meme generated perhaps a year ago

taxi 2025-10-26 03:45 p.m.

/s/ OperatorTaxi esq.

taxi 2025-10-26 03:45 p.m.

https://tenor.com/view/chess-chesscom-candidates-chess-gif-chess-funny-gif-26163840

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-26 03:45 p.m.

Criminal threats is against the state code counsellor.

baker 2025-10-26 03:45 p.m.

chess.com

taxi 2025-10-26 03:46 p.m.

Prosecute me!

taxi 2025-10-26 03:46 p.m.

I have not threatened anyone, counsellor.

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:48 p.m.

Your conduct is appalling, and you will not escape simply because a ruling was entered.

You will be formally referred to the Department of Justice, who may wish to carry out an investigation into your actions, specifically the calling of death against a prosecutor.

You will be formally held in contempt soon and charged with a hefty monetary fine.

You will be referred to the state bar association to have the validity of your license investigated.

I have put up with your snarky comments and sarcastic attitude throughout the trial and been very accomodating and respectful to all the parties here. Just because a ruling was made against your client, that does not grant you the right to crash out or call for people's heads. Such behaviour is that of a 16th century monarch, or a 21st century toddler. You clearly belong to the latter class, and you will face the appropriate repercussions for acting in such a manner.

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:49 p.m.

If you wish to get out of it, you send a proper response, not one that starts off by telling me that you are unaware of what contempt is and that you want to be held like a baby, and that ends with you once again insulting the opposing counsel. All of those statements point to a significant lack of mental development on your behalf, as you are emulating a child.

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:49 p.m.

I'm tired of this happening in my case channels.

taxi 2025-10-26 03:50 p.m.

Was not that deep

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:51 p.m.

cc: @taxi

@AlbertBlackwell

@acarlyle

(edited)

taxi

Was not that deep

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:51 p.m.

You called for somebody to be beheaded buddy

taxi 2025-10-26 03:51 p.m.

case is over why u making such a fuss over a couple images and a joke

Ocazius

cc: @taxi

@AlbertBlackwell

@acarlyle

(edited)

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-26 03:51 p.m.

Seen, thank you your honour.

taxi 2025-10-26 03:51 p.m.

have a day off

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:52 p.m.

Defendant has been sentenced in-game, case is closed.

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:52 p.m.

I reiterate my thanks to the prosecution for getting through this quickly, I no longer express any gratitude to the defendant counsel for his participation in this trial.

taxi 2025-10-26 03:53 p.m.

https://tenor.com/view/cat-reaction-michi-triste-crying-cat-reaction-sad-cat-hannicion-gif-17190162121303461099

taxi 2025-10-26 03:53 p.m.

@Ocazius

this is who you're contempting btw

baker 2025-10-26 03:57 p.m.

@Ocazius

your honor

baker 2025-10-26 03:57 p.m.

am i free to leave this server

baker

am i free to leave this server

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:59 p.m.

Yeah all good, case is closed now

Ocazius 2025-10-26 03:59 p.m.

@taxi

I've decided not to fine you or hold you in contempt(edited)

Ocazius 2025-10-26 04:00 p.m.

I'll let the State Bar and the DoJ do their investigations into you

baker 2025-10-26 04:00 p.m.

what

Ocazius 2025-10-26 04:00 p.m.

Oopsies

baker 2025-10-26 04:00 p.m.

wasnt i already investigated

Ocazius 2025-10-26 04:00 p.m.

You're good

baker 2025-10-26 04:00 p.m.

oh ok

Ocazius 2025-10-26 04:00 p.m.

You can leave now if you wish

baker 2025-10-26 04:00 p.m.

so how this work btw

baker 2025-10-26 04:00 p.m.

am i automatically jailed

baker 2025-10-26 04:00 p.m.

or do i need to join the game

AlbertBlackwell 2025-10-26 04:01 p.m.

Yea and you can't expunge it

baker 2025-10-26 04:01 p.m.

Ocazius 2025-10-26 04:01 p.m.

I jailed you, you don't need to join the game I don't think(edited)

Ocazius 2025-10-26 04:01 p.m.

I'm pretty sure the time just runs

Ocazius

@taxi I've decided not to fine you or hold you in contempt(edited)

taxi 2025-10-26 04:02 p.m.

thanks

taxi

thanks

Ocazius 2025-10-26 04:02 p.m.

Have you failed to read rule number 1 of my chamber rules?

https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1405279508038422609/1405280562784108636

taxi 2025-10-26 04:03 p.m.

Apologies, Senor Salsa.

taxi 2025-10-26 04:03 p.m.

https://tenor.com/view/epico-gif-10005337172608430078

Ocazius used

/transcript

clerkFlow Bot2025-10-26 04:03 p.m.

Creating transcript..

clerkFlow Bot2025-10-26 04:03 p.m.

https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1329678726383927409/1432097398796324975 Successfully created transcript.

Ocazius

Defendant is hereby found guilty of Counts 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10. Defendant is sentenced to an incarceration lasting 240 minutes in the Clark County Correctional Faci...

acarlyle 2025-10-26 04:51 p.m.

Thank you Your Honor.

profile used

/transcript

clerkFlow Bot2025-11-18 11:07 p.m.

Creating transcript..

clerkFlow Bot2025-11-18 11:07 p.m.

https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1329678726383927409/1440554026054713545 Successfully created transcript.

clerkFlow Bot2025-11-19 01:26 a.m.

Channel Permissions Synced

Permissions have been synced to Volume XIII.

Exported 1892 messages